Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RapidBlocs

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 Speedy keep as the nominator is a confirmed blocked sockpuppet ‎. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 19:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RapidBlocs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing to establish notability. Only two sources, which are external links in the article, actually cover it. It has a mere name-drop in the other sources which document it. Interestingly, it was a candidate for speedy deletion but was remade again. Ominateu (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 8 March 2024 (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.