Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All Appropriate Inquiry

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All Appropriate Inquiry

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NOTABILITY. Sending WP:APPNOTE to Interlaker. Boleyn (talk) 15:21, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Possibly worth a redirect to Phase I environmental site assessment. Boleyn (talk) 15:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not seeing how the two relate enough for a redirect. Interlaker (talk) 04:07, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 02:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:40, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Regarding the above comment, it's already included at Phase I environmental site assessment in the Background section. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:36, 10 August 2015 (UTC

Delete as per nom. Unlikely to ever constitute a 'stand alone'.Pincrete (talk) 14:38, 15 August 2015 (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.