Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maintenance audit

: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. Proponents for keeping don't present good sources, and just saying "is notable GNG" will normally be given very little weight by the closing administrator. Aaron Brenneman (talk) 01:52, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

=[[Maintenance audit]]=

:{{la|Maintenance audit}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Maintenance audit}})

Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. -- $Σ talk contribs$ 06:41, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Keep. Article is in fact original thought and needs to be restarted with references such as [http://www.smpltd.co.uk/consultancy/maintenance-audits.htm] [http://www.rushtonintl.com/auditing.html]. —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 07:39, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

:*Comment Just curious have you said what you meant here as your response? You wish to keep the article yet you think it is original research?--User:Warrior777 (talk) 10:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

:::I said the article at present is OR and needs to be rewritten, not deleted. —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 15:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Keep This subject is in fact notable (WP:GNG) and the article clearly defines many parameters of the subject. The article does however need sourcing (WP:VERIFY) and expansion for length and content. This article does have potential (WP:POTENTIAL).--User:Warrior777 (talk) 10:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Delete: Pure OR. Even if the subject turns out to be notable, it won't ever be notable enough to warrant a stand-alone article. Whatever can be found can be merged into preventive maintenance or similar articles. After all, the best one could hope for is a well sourced definition. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 12:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Delete Content fork of audit. Curb Chain (talk) 15:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Delete. Original research that reads like it's from somebody selling consulting services. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

: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.