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. MBisanz ^talk 00:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Earth Systems[edit]

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

Not notable and no assertion of any significant notability. No references at all . Fails WP:CORP. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 08:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not an easy name to search for any relevant sources, and I haven't found any on a first couple of searches, but it may have been better to start with maintenance tags to encourage the (new user) article creator to add any available references rather than go straight to AfD? AllyD (talk) 09:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment reply - I did exactly as you have done and looked for refs and found none. If despite the best efforts of a new editor, the topic is unequivocally not-notable, dragging out the process over several weeks doesn't actually help anybody or Wikipedia. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have added a couple of references which establish existence, but they fall short of WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 17:46, 23 April 2013 (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.