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. MBisanztalk 05:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No prejudice to recreation if they receive in-depth coverage from an independent agency. - Eldereft (cont.) 07:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per WP:CORP. Schuym1 (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Boston (talk) 10:36, 10 December 2008 (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.