Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gollynomics

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 Speedied as G10 (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 22:53, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gollynomics

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

Fails WP:GNG A Google search only finds this article and a mention on Facebook Theroadislong (talk) 20:47, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft If not yet ready to go live then draft it. Original editor is planning on working to improve article with links to charity projects and other additions that should help with the claims of notability. Amortias (T)(C) 20:50, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Cordless Larry: There appears to be enough evidence of its existence to remove the issue of it being a hoax. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amortias (talk • contribs) 21:17, 29 December 2015‎ (UTC)[reply]

Even if it isn't a hoax, there are zero independent sources so it's a clear notability fail. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:20, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (preferably speedily), as it clearly fails the notability criteria. I'm half wondering if it's a hoax, given the connotations of the name. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:59, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am appalled that my speedy tag was removed, subjects as contentious as this need reliable sources to ascertain notability this had none and should have been deleted.Theroadislong (talk) 21:12, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now at best as my searches simply found nothing better at all. Notifying tagger Nepaxt. SwisterTwister talk 21:21, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Not notable enough now, fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Userfying gives the new user chance to get feedback and work on it. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:26, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOOSOON The official website isn't even up yet! Adam9007 (talk) 21:30, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 21:36, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 21:36, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I sent it to speedy delete on G10 - attack page. Szzuk (talk) 22:23, 29 December 2015 (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.