Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Bearing Association


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 12:00, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

World Bearing Association

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This organization does not seem to me to meet the notability guidelines for Wikipedia. Delete. A Radish for Boris (talk) 10:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Seems like an advertisement, but it's really a trade network (in other words' its an advertisement network.) Oh, and I couldn't find any better sources. Sven Manguard  Talk  00:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep The notability guidelines are simply those based on 3rd party sourcing. Being a commercial organisation is no reason for deletion. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And what are the independent reliable sources that offer significant coverage of this organization? The article is currently sourced to a press release from a member organization and a reprint of a press release from the organization itself. Searches do not turn up anything else. A Radish for Boris (talk) 13:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note The nominator User:A Radish for Boris has been blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Otto4711. I am not striking his contributions here, though, because they seem objectively reasonable and not directly related to his previous abuse.  I have no opinion on this AfD. Jclemens (talk) 17:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of reliable sources. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  23:09, 12 October 2010 (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.