Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAKSA


 * 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   redirect to Pakistan Student Association. If the redirect gets reverted without consensus being reached first then it can be protected. Davewild (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

PAKSA

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is an orphaned stub on a non-notable student organization. I was a bit surprised to see it has been on Wikipedia for several years, perhaps it seems notable because it is a special-interest organization. My recommendation -- delete and redirect to Pakistan Student Association. Danski14(talk) 18:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 20:20, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:21, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't know about redirecting because Pakistan Student Association has been unsourced for years. But just for the record, you don't need to bring an article to AfD in order to redirect it.  Erpert  (let's talk about it) 23:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: true, in this case though I was hoping to get the article deleted first, then redirected. I wouldn't want someone to revert the redirect. (which I've seen happen) Plus, perhaps technically it isn't the correct redirect, but it seems right. Danski14(talk) 18:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * If someone reverts an ordinary editorial action such as a redirect, one follows the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Talk:PAKSA is right there to be used.  AFD is not a big hammer for winning editorial disputes.  Uncle G (talk) 14:37, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I see, well, this doesn't have anything to do with a particular editorial dispute. I just saw the page and thought it should be deleted. Danski14(talk) 22:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect. --Kudpung (talk) 09:39, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * 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.