Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart intercom codes

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. DS 17:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

non-notable, unencylopedic. Internal corporate info. Dr. Cash 20:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with the Walmart article. JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 20:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. I don't want to merge with the Wal-Mart article because it's non-notable. --Bigtop (tk|cb|em|ea) 21:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or weak merge. These seem to show up all over the internet, so maybe including them in the main article would be ok, but it's not really neccisary. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 21:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Seems too non-notable to be merged. —Mets501 (talk) 21:38, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep if references added before end of AfD, otherwise delete. JYolkowski // talk 22:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• What??? Delete!!! Walmart intercom codes? We certainly cannot have internal policy and procedure manuals on Wikipedia. I don't even think this belongs in the Wal mart article AdamBiswanger1 23:38, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I agree with the nominator and AdamBiswanger1. Article is non-notable and Wikipedia is definitely not the place for procedure manuals. --Tuspm^{(C | @)} 23:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I've heard of these before, and I don't think there supost to be in the public ___domain. This is something Wikipedia could actually get sued over I recken. -Royalguard11^Talk 02:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's why we need the references (or lack thereof), to determine whether these are verifiable or if they're trade secrets or whatever. JYolkowski // talk 02:40, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I encourage all editors to expend the effort in doing the research. It was not hard to find a reference for "Code Adam" that is published by Wal-Mart itself, given that we have an entire article — Code Adam — on the subject. Uncle G 11:43, 25 July 2006 (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.