Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National U


 * 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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 17:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

National U

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Defunct student magazine thar never achieved any notability and with no sources fails WP:V. Delete view. Bridgeplayer 23:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. It was a newspaper run by the National Union of Students and distributed to university campuses all around Australia for many years. On what basis are you asserting that it "never achieved any notability"? It just needs a good expansion. Rebecca 01:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Rebecca alexis+kate=? 03:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by M.V.E.i. (talk • contribs) 19:49, August 27, 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I think the nominator need to ascertain what methods of checking for notability or sources - has any standard check of the australian national library collection been made - unless some verification by the nominaor of why and how never achieved any notabiluty can be proved - most curious. SatuSuro 01:23, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as article does not present sufficient evidience notablity WP:CORP, although it may still be held in esteem by its former editors and contributors. Lack of access magazine archive means it won't achieve notability any time soon. --Gavin Collins 12:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems semi-important and historically relevantMbisanz 06:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Smell the history. Joestella 15:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:ORG. Unless someone can cite a reliable source (defined here), this should go. -- B figura  (talk) 22:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Recurring dreams 11:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: of course it is notable, it was influential in its (my) time.--Grahamec 14:58, 1 September 2007 (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.