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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SixWeeks[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)

Fails WP:EVENT - mild local/narrow news coverage at the time, but web search finds no lasting impact. Found no mentions since this took place, either for the project or its creator. Unlikely more can be added to this article beyond the project's own webpage. HalJor (talk) 01:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This source was the only significant coverage I could find. Fails WP:GNG. I also find the WP:NEVENT/WP:NOTNEWS argument convincing. This seems like a click bait, pique your interest type story that isn't particularly encyclopedic. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:09, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This looks like a way to create a pseudo-biography on a narrow part of a life that is trying to avoid directly confronting the fact the person in question is not notable by masquerading as being about an event.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2021 (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.