Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vision 2016

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vision 2016 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Promotional - ArtsRescuer • Talk me 11:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC) — ArtsRescuer (talk • contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Shafinusri (talk • contribs). [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:09, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:09, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Dosen't seem to have WP:RS coverage sufficent enough to pass WP:GNG or WP:EVENT.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nothing particularly convincing of its own notable article here, can be mentioned as needed, if at all, somewhere else. SwisterTwister talk 19:27, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @ArtsRescuer: Please provide a rationale that is longer than one word. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 20:27, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - as per Ddcm8991, I'm not seeing near enough coverage to meet notability standards and warrant an article on this. GAB^Hello! 00:53, 25 May 2016 (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.