Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sigma Upsilon-Upsilon Lambda

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:28, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sigma Upsilon-Upsilon Lambda

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

This article is unsourced and so provides no information as to notability. (It also reads like an advertisement for the organization.) Robert McClenon (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 20:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 20:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ~~or migrate to Draft:. Either is acceptable~~. Nominator has it correct. Fiddle Faddle 20:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is already in Draft: space, so simple deletion is fine. Fiddle Faddle 20:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - As per Timtrent, this appears to have been a copy-and-paste from Draft space into mainspace. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:34, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the current version is not convincing of better improvement. SwisterTwister talk 07:16, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacks significant coverage in third party reliable sources.--RioHondo (talk) 15:11, 20 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.