Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Promotions and Transfers


 * 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   speedy delete. A1, quite reasonable here. Tone 21:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Promotions and Transfers

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

Unencyclopedic trivia Mayalld (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC) The Promotions and Transfers every year is the time of Joy for many and time of Change for a lot of persons[1][2]. The different countries and different companies in a country have different times for Promotions and Transfers. Definitly doesn't provide any context. Tagged as such.-- Patton t / c 16:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per A1 no context.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   --  fr33k  man   -s-  16:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Context is just barely enough for me to figure it out. It's still pointless, though, so Delete.   Powers T 17:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * speedy delete context is very shakey  fr33k man   -s-  17:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Very weak context and trivial Frozenevolution (talk) 18:34, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Has no RS coverage; the sources apply only internally to the companies publishing them. Quantumobserver (talk) 17:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Nothing of value here, it's an essay. §FreeRangeFrog 18:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. It must be created by somebody who got a promotion recently. That is the context! Unencyclopedic. Salih  ( talk ) 19:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Unencyclopedic. - Mgm|(talk) 21:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. The topic is worthy of an article and I can see nothing close in Category:Human resource management. But this not the article so rub out and start again. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:35, 16 February 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.