Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Most significant change


 * 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) 00:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Most significant change

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Promotional article/advert on original research riddled with inappropriate or vanity external links. Descriptions are vague and geared to click external links to non-notable researcher's theses. Boffob (talk) 13:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC) 
 * Keep Needs an intro and the good references that are hidden in here need better link targets and inlining their cites. As a topic though, it seems notable and supported by independent references. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  treelo  radda  00:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. The article claims that two people are promoting a theory, does seem a bit promotional as well.  P HARMBOY  ( TALK ) 01:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Pharmboy. Stifle (talk) 13:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I dont know how or where else to make this comment (please advise me at rick.davies@gmail.com) but, the deletion decision is uninformed.The MSC method has been in use since the mid-1990s, it is used by a large number of aid agencies around the world, especially NGOs, and there is a dedicated email list of 900+ people who share information about its use. There have also been articles about it published in academic journals on evaluation in the USA, Australia and the UK. If the style of the article needs improvement, then let it be improved —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rckjdavies (talk • contribs) 10:13, 6 November 2008 (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.