Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audience development

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. Sandstein 10:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Audience development

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article from 2007 contains a single reference to a PDF. In a WP:BEFORE I did come across this which isn't nothing, but this still seems to fail WP:NOTNEO. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 22:57, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- HindWiki^Connect 00:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:44, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete total lack of good sources. There may be an article here, but it is unclear this is the right name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:59, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.