Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oaksterdam


 * 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. John254 02:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Oaksterdam

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article looks like WP:OR and lack of reliable sources Chris!  c t 03:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - While I agree that the article in its current state needs some work, a news search shows that the term easily passes WP:N, not to mention WP:V. --jonny-mt(t)(c) Tell me what you think! 06:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, sounds like a notable subject. Article could use better sourcing though. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 20:17, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * keep - This proves notability. Corvus cornix 23:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * keep - the article is very poor, though njaard 03:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep as notable, but see above for sourcing. Bearian 21:41, 12 November 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.