Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Compact


 * 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. If you wish to have this in your userspace you may contact me. Grand master  ka  07:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The Compact
A minor group of people doing a one-off sort of exercise, with a single print media mention. Don't think it is worth keeping. -- Gwern (contribs) 16:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Too early for an AfD.  The article made two claims for notability - firstly that it had been picked up by major media and secondly that it is spreading to other areas.  The first has now been removed as the citation request was around for 11 days, the second I've asked for citation requests.  If that information can then be removed I'd say they were non-notable. JASpencer 10:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep This concept has now made it to North Dakota.  TWo print media articles that I have found - one in Entrepeneur and the other a SF article.  MSNBC picked it up:  http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14122324/


 * Delete--Peta 04:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 03:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - not notable yet; a group of fifty people who have been covered in some local media doesn't pass the bar. It might be a good idea to stick it in somebody's userspace in case it does catch on, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and the article shouldn't exist unless it does.  --Hyperbole 20:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Hyperbole, and it seems the MSNBC link listed above is dead. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 20:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete The San Francisco newspaper article certainly helps their case, but until I see this elsewhere I remain unconvinced that this is anything more than a very local phenomenon. -Elmer Clark 23:35, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Unless it grows to something more, however Wikipedia should not be facilitating that growth. --NuclearZer0 15:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - as much of the article is written in first person plural "we plan" "our goal", etc., not only is it not notable, but borders on vanity SkerHawx 20:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or Userfy per above . Article can be re-created if it grows to be something more. --Richard 05:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable enough, one article doesn't quite cut it. Sandstein 20:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nominator or userfy for now. Yamaguchi先生 23:16, 9 October 2006
 * Delete per nom, only single mention even claimed,  Tewfik Talk 02:41, 10 October 2006 (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.