Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midmac


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Midmac

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable bidding system; fails WP:GNG - at least one source (the Haarlem book) is self-published. ukexpat (talk) 03:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  -- ukexpat (talk) 03:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. The most recent book was published by lulu.com, but the other one was published by Batsford (see Anova Books), so not self-pub, and it appears that's a fairly reputable publisher for books of this kind. Jon Drabble's book was reviewed in The Bridge World. Pcap ping  05:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Second relist rationale. Relisting at the request of the nominator. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, this is just a how to manual for this bidding process. The two current references are both primary sources and do not establish notability.  One review of one of the books that created this system is not enough to establish notability.   GB fan  talk 00:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:N insufficient 3rd party coverage to pass. -- RP459  Talk/Contributions 23:26, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.