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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:26, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JStar[edit]

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

Article seems to be a blatant advert. A lot of the sources are blogs, thus failing WP:RS and WP:GNG. -- Rsrikanth05 (talk) 20:23, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:55, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:55, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - searches turned up zero. On any of them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:39, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom lacks WP:SIGCOV.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:58, 28 December 2015 (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.