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  20:53, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Compostmodern[edit]

Compostmodern (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An advertorially-toned article on an unremarkable organisation. Significant RS coverage not found. What comes up is about the event by the organisation and is PR-like. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:39, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:39, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:32, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:04, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:43, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:09, 24 February 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.