Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trunk Archive


 * 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 soft delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit  00:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Trunk Archive

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

It doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG, or have a suitable WP:ATD. I considered merge/redirect to Waddell & Reed but it doesn't even have a mention in that article at the moment, so may unbalance it. Boleyn (talk) 15:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Denmark,  and New York.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject as required by WP:NCORP and WP:SIRS. Jfire (talk) 02:38, 16 February 2024 (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.