Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EGM Green (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 no consensus. with no prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EGM Green

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

There weren't many comments at the first AfD and editing has changed since February 2008 and my searches actually found no recent and better coverage with these results [1], here and here. No one loves environmentalism more than me but there's simply nothing to suggest better improvement here. Pinging the only still active user Eastmain and notifying author Rankun (although it seems there's certainly not active anymore). SwisterTwister talk 21:41, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 21:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 21:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 21:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep without enthusiasm. The company isn't exciting, but I think it's notable. The coverage shown at http://egmgreen.com/news_press.html and http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2008/11/12/slot-machines-and-gaming-tables-going-green-80410 is probably sufficient. I see that the most recent date on that page in January 1, 2010. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:24, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 02:22, 5 October 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.