Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ohio Higher Education Rail Network (2nd nomination)


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Ohio Higher Education Rail Network
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Proposed rail network with no coverage and no sources. The only source I can find is a proposed resolution written by the creator of this entry, Jerry Wicks. Wperdue (talk) 15:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Please remove this one. It was an accidental second nomination due to latency issues. I have indicated this in the other nomination. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2009 (UTC)wperdue
 * I have closed the other nomination, since it was the first one and this is the second. The discussion can be continued here. (adding the &lt;small&gt; tag to these comments)— LinguistAtLarge • Talk  15:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is written more like an essay or even as rhetoric.  But the main issue is in finding references for it.  If this project is truly notable, and it ought to be because it is large, then there will be many references.  But there are not.  Since there are not I must conclude that it is either not notable, or that its notability is not verifiable.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't DELETE Gentlemen, the OHERN Institute is new. Please visit our web site maintained on the campus of Bowling Green State University (ohern.bgsu.edu).  The Institute was created toward the end of last year for the purpose of researching the issues surrounding the creation of a statewide rail network linking Ohio's colleges and universities.  I'm sorry there are no other links to this topic as yet.  These matters take time.  We are in meetings with various city, county and state officials.  Unfortunately, these meetings do not generate the type of links you may be seeking.  There will be a good deal of press coming on this matter in the coming months, but again, we are moving slowly on this since it is a complicated matter that requires judicious work.  Thank you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JerryWicks (talk • contribs) 21:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete, Speedy Close ^^ Obvious COI, G11, & notability R3ap3R.inc (talk) 20:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  | Talk 18:15, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete speculation and OR. lack of notability as yet. After it gets substantial public notice, then it can be an article. DGG (talk) 23:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions.  —Sarilox (talk) 18:32, 10 April 2009 (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.