Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NIB Health Funds
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 Delete. Lack of independent reliable sources means notability concerns under WP:ORG were not addressed. Shimeru 14:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NIB Health Funds[edit]
- NIB Health Funds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Upon cleaning up and sorting out some stubs, I came across this article and cleaned it up a little, however after this I began to wonder whether the article was notable as all it is for is a company which sponsors another company, although only created a few days ago it stil does not satisfy WP:NN Tellyaddict 15:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, unless sources/notability info can be provided mikm 16:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep - I have added a bit of source/notability info. NIB is a big non-profit health fund in Australia, not just a sponsor of a football team. Plus they are going to shake things up soon with controversial plans to demutualise. I suppose after this happens they may become a big evil corporation - then will they deserve a Wikipedia page? Who really decides these things? And does anyone know how to get rid of foot odour from sandals?WunNation 18:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment WunNation's edit history shows it to be a single-purpose vandalism/trolling account. - Iridescenti (talk to me!) 14:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep References from the Sydney Morning Herald, notability seems sufficient.
- Comment I note that this not-for-profit uses a .com.au domain instead of the more logical .org.au -- this has no bearing on the keep/delete debate, but it's a pet peeve of mine anyway. *Dan T.* 20:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as references are now provided. I certainly would like to think they are notable, as they will pay my hospital bills if I become ill here.Jörg Vogt 23:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Useless Comment It is funny how the vandal mentioned above wrote this real article. perhaps it could be deleted just to spite him. Just kidding!Jörg Vogt 23:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A useless comment from a useless piece of shit —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aleksi Peltola (talk • contribs) 22:59, 4 April 2007 (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.