Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red labor

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-26 14:50Z

[edit] Red labor

Red labor (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

From deletion review, this article was not considered spammy enough for a speedy deletion but questions about notability remain, which is why it is listed here now. Procedural listing, I have no opinion. ~ trialsanderrors 05:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete does not meet notability criteria. Danny Lilithborne 05:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - fails WP:ORG. MER-C 05:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete the only claims to notability are implied from the references section - which comprise almost all of the article. Those implied claims appear to fail to establish notablity. --Krich (talk) 05:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Just H 06:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Fails to establish notability. --Folantin 09:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete n-n. DaveApter 10:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable, perilously close to spam. Robertissimo 12:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as low salt diet spam - verges on the real thing, but just different enough... SkierRMH 20:26, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Bigtop 23:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Fails noteablity only 16,000 hits on Google. Davidpdx 08:38, 26 December 2006 (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.