Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GLUMP

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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The result was Nomination withdrawn the nom voted for keep and strike through the deletion rationale.--JForget 23:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GLUMP

GLUMP (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Very short article and non-encyclopedic content UserDoe 21:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete, the article is OR and does not cite sources. STORMTRACKER 94 21:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. Oli Filth(talk) 21:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Change of opinion - whilst the article has been expanded, I'm not convinced by the subject's notability; a Google search for "GLUMP LLU -eircom" (i.e. search terms that don't include references to eircom) returns just 8 hits. Oli Filth(talk) 03:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

--> Well Duh! only Ireland uses GLUMP and eircom is the Monopoly encumbent. Comreg & eircom came up with it. I'm amazed -eircom finds any GLUMP reference. Hence the value of explaining it. Wattyirl 23:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Note - user indefinitely blocked as disruptive sockpuppet. — xDanielx T/C 22:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

The article cites one of the only two possible sources. This article contains no research.

Please do not delete. A reference to GLUMP is needed to understand developments in LLU in Ireland, Magnet DSL and eircom. Any suggestions or improvements would be a better path user:Wattyirl

  • Keep and fix. Bearian 22:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Fixed, hopefully per WP:HEY. Bearian 22:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand This article has been fixed since i nominated it. The given reason "Very short article and non-encyclopedic content" does not apply anymore. Right now it might be a stub, but it can be expanded. It does not meet Wikipedia's Deletion policy any longer. I hereby take the nomination back. Regards UserDoe 22:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand/source properly. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 04:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
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.