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 keep. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 00:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ZADZADZ[edit]

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

Doesn't seem notable - many references are that of the actual website. RT | Talk 07:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems very notable. Houston Chronicle. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Numerous University papers. TheDroidsYoureLookingFor (talk) 07:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 19:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The articles in the Houston Chronicle and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel qualify as multiple, non-trivial sources.
  Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Do)
  19:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - bad nomination, per noted sources - David Gerard (talk) 13:23, 9 March 2008 (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.