- 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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 02:18, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Article reads too much as original research and copyright violation. Article is uncategorized and is orphan Mecanismo | Talk 21:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I'm not sure whether this research is copyvio or original, but the essay is too diffuse to merit inclusion or redirect. Seems to be talking about problem people in team structures. Durova 21:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks! Mo0[talk] 04:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Random cut and pastes under a random title.Obina 10:48, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete It's either copyvio or as above. {{test1}} the original author. —gorgan_almighty 13:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikify or Delete This material is really typical of a consultant group that promotes better practices in a workplace, meaning that ad hoc explanations are plentiful, references scarce, and big words abundant. Importance of the concept should be estabished, the context should be properly set up, and the content condensed to perhaps 1 or 2 paragraphs in plain english, not consultant-ish. Santtus
- 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.