Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Port Hills Geotechnical Group

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Port Hills Geotechnical Group

Port Hills Geotechnical Group (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)

Nifty group but I don't see any evidence of it passing WP:NORG. The scholarly papers that are cited here are all authored by people who were part of the group or whose employers were members of the group and thus are not independent. In my WP:BEFORE search I didn't find any other independent, reliable source WP:SIGCOV to pass the appropriate guideline. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:38, 3 January 2025 (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.
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Port Hills Geotechnical Group, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.