Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 January 1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:51, 1 January 2012

I found book coverage - [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], and [6]. The deleting admin hasn't edited since August. SL93 (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing stopping you from creating a new article with these sources, or from adding them to the old article (which has been moved to project space here). Provided the article has some sort of evidence of notability beyond that considered at the AfD then it won't be speedily deleted. Hut 8.5 20:40, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright. I will add them to the incubated article and fix the article up. SL93 (talk) 20:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I added the five sources (one of the above is a repeat) and moved the article to mainspace. There is more book coverage, but I think that should do. SL93 (talk) 21:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 *There's nothing stopping you from creating a new article with these sources, or from adding them to the old article (which has been moved to project space [[Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Keith Akers|here]]). Provided the article has some sort of evidence of notability beyond that considered at the AfD then it won't be speedily deleted. '''''<font color="#FF0000">[[User:Hut 8.5|Hut 8.5]]</font>''''' 20:40, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 **Alright. I will add them to the incubated article and fix the article up. [[User:SL93|SL93]] ([[User talk:SL93|talk]]) 20:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
+**I added the five sources (one of the above is a repeat) and moved the article to mainspace. There is more book coverage, but I think that should do. [[User:SL93|SL93]] ([[User talk:SL93|talk]]) 21:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)