Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TD9

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 22:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TD9

superfluous areacruft... an entry for every postcode in the world would be absurd Usrnme h8er 17:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom Captainj 17:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per existing convention [1]. Take it up in proper channels (i.e. policy add/change). - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 19:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. digital_me^(t/c) 20:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. -- Kjkolb 21:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Stifle (talk) 11:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete People in london or Manchester might refer to W3 or M25 as identifiable areas, but who talks about TD9?--Runcorn 20:49, 4 June 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.