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. Courcelles 09:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vegetarian Victoria

[edit]

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

fails WP:ORG. could only find coverage under its old name in gnews, but it's more a few comments in the media by a member rather than indepth coverage of the organisation itself. [1]. LibStar (talk) 07:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:36, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because of lack of sources. When I typed their name into a search engine, I came back with nothing notable. If someone can find a newspaper article or something relating to its credibility then great. SwisterTwister (talk) 03:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I could not find any outside sourcing about this organization, and none is provided at the article. --MelanieN (talk) 21:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notable and reasonably covered - if you bother to look carefully enough Satu Suro 12:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ITSNOTABLE. Please provide evidence of indepth coverage. LibStar (talk) 12:53, 13 June 2011 (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.