Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The OC wall calendar (2nd nomination)

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 procedural keep per clear consensus that a week after the first discussion concluded with "keep" is too soon. XOR'easter (talk) 21:26, 17 June 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

The OC wall calendar[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

An article on this subject does not make sense. It fails WP:GNG and no significant coverage can be seen so far. Srijanx22 (talk) 03:03, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural Keep - An AFD that closed unanimously as Keep just ended a week ago. That is way too soon for a re-nomination. Rorshacma (talk) 03:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Keep as above. I was the nominator for previous AfD. Not sure how a second one came about; this article is pretty well orphaned and pretty much only accessible through categories or wikiproject pages. ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, preferably speedily. WP:BEFORE B5 says "Check to see if enough time has passed since previous nominations before renominating." One week is not enough time. Part of BEFORE is also searching for sources, and plenty were provided in the last discussion to show that GNG is passed. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:05, 17 June 2022 (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.