Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abstract groove

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. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abstract groove

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

Does not meet WP:GNG. None of these references actually demonstrate the notability of the studio, and it does not inherit notability from its director. ubiquity (talk) 16:58, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as questionable, as mentioned. Delete for now at best, SwisterTwister talk 23:48, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 17:50, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 17:52, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Luigi Pane or delete. I see some trivial mentions and press releases, but there's not enough significant coverage. Hopefully, Pane is more notable than his studio. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2016 (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.