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. JForget 22:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NXg[edit]

NXg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

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

A merger to The Hindu was proposed but I decided not to do it when I was merging other supplements. Reasons: 1 - No substantive content worth merging (main article includes one line on what this is), 2 - Content is out dated, the Hindu changed this from a supplement to an online mag, 3 - This will result in a 'Redirect - other uses' hat note on the article, unwanted in The Hindu. I've also discussed this with User:Thryduulf who proposed the merger. Xe agrees that AfD is a better option. Delete -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 19:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 19:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per SpacemanSpiff's nomination rationale. I debated marking it for deletion when I proposed the merger. Thryduulf (talk) 19:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete-besides the above rationale, I do not find anything on this page worth keeping.keystoneridin! (talk) 17:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Title is not a likely search word, and a redirect is not reuired to comply with GFDL/CC-NY either. Abecedare (talk) 07:49, 15 August 2009 (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.