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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shmoo Group

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

It is borderline, hence the 11 years it's been waiting in CAT:NN. A successful organisation that works in different countries and has some coverage. Most of the coverage is in primary sources/advertising. It has the involvement of notable members but I can't find evidence of it meeting the level of significance and coverage we need for WP:GNG or WP:CORP. Boleyn (talk) 17:32, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:42, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable Devokewater (talk) 20:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A general websearch turned up nothing that suggested notability to me. However a Google book search throw up plenty of references in RIS sustained over man6 years. None of it seems particularly in-depth but there may be a case for a GNG pass. Mccapra (talk) 02:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:25, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm leaving toward delete because the coverage seems to be adverts, trivial, or things that otherwise don't pass WP:NORG. There doesn't seem to be the reliable in-depth secondary sources needed to pass it. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:50, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not finding anything substantial myself. Ravenswing 07:44, 25 July 2020 (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.