Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quality Objectives


 * 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 merge to ISO 9000. ISO 9001, the target mentioned in the discussion, is also a redirect there. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 03:01, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Objectives

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Could be merged into ISO 9001 (as it is one of its requirements) but makes no sense as a stand-alone article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:16, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * merge/delete - I agree that this should be deleted, although interestingly, various articles link to this one; but this seems to be through Template:International_Organization_for_Standardization which could be modified. —░] PaleoNeonate █ ⏎ ? ERROR ░ 20:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Several of the links, if not all, were created by the same editor. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Given the info below, merge. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)


 *  Keep or merge - Keep or merge, as this is part of ISO 9001, and may be a useful search term. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Given the option, merge to ISO 9001 leaving a redirect. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge/delete - Merge as to any useful information to related article and then delete the stand alone article herein as not notable. Kierzek (talk) 18:23, 23 April 2017 (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.