Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military for sale by owner

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. postdlf (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Military for sale by owner[edit]

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

Not notable, likely promotional. Calabe 1992 02:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not promotional it is intended to help military families during their move, similar to the For Sale by Owner article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_sale_by_owner Please help keep the article live, give me inputs on what can make the article better for the community. --Rhim15 (talk) 02:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Intended to help" is not what we do here. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is to provide information, is that a suitable term? --Rhim15 (talk) 02:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't really say anything For sale by owner does not. I can't find anything on Google News or Google Books using that term. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have a lot more experience on Wikipedia than I do, can you please give me advice on how to improve the article and keep it live?--Rhim15 (talk) 02:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer: You can't. Nothing out there seems to use the term. I see nothing that makes "for sale by owner" different if military families are involved. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Spam. Tom Reedy (talk) 03:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems like a nice organization, but that doesn't make them notable.JoelWhy (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do not delete the article provided valuable information and is not spam. My vote keep it live and offer contrustiv criticism not just delete spam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.225.111.50 (talk) 16:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:GNG. As I pointed out above, I couldn't find anything reliable using the term "military for sale by owner". Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can the term be under the For Sale by Owner article?--Rhim15 (talk) 18:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. Glomming it onto another article doesn't fix the fact that no sources discuss the "military" flavor of "for sale by owner". Regardless of where the info is, it needs reliable, third party sources. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The term is not brought up in reliable sources. SL93 (talk) 00:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:59, 12 April 2012 (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.