- 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. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ilmoamal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Organization. Zero refs. Gbooks never heard of it. Nor did gnews. Lacks substantial rs coverage. Tagged for notability and lack of refs for over a year. Epeefleche (talk) 05:31, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 15:11, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable. Hits on Gbooks appear to mainly relate to personal names or a magazine from 100 years ago. Cusop Dingle (talk) 17:52, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Agree, delete as non-notable. Deathlibrarian (talk) 13:13, 21 January 2012 (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.