Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FUCM

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FUCM (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)

I wasn't able to find any coverage and the article doesn't link to anything that would establish notability. The article was created by User:Bamatfucm, and one of the founders of FUCM is Bam. toweli (talk) 05:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Australia. toweli (talk) 05:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails GNG. I can't believe that an article with poor sources and no inline citations has lasted this long for over 16 years. LibStar (talk) 05:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only published independent sources I could find were: [1][2] [3], which don't establish notability.

Traumnovelle (talk) 06:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Fails WP:NCORP. GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:09, 2 June 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.