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. Biblioworm 01:07, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scripts At Work

[edit]

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

Defunct local organization, fails WP:ORG. Kelly ^hi! 17:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No significant coverage. BMK (talk) 15:31, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Only the barest of local coverage to the extent that it can cite WP:RS at all, and that every link to a person is a red link kind doesn't help its claim either. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:45, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:ORG. Not a lot of local coverage and, as far as I can see, little-to-no regional/national coverage. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:47, 14 November 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.