Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remote bookkeeping
=[[Remote bookkeeping]]=
:{{la|Remote bookkeeping}} ([{{fullurl:Remote bookkeeping|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remote bookkeeping}}&action=delete}} delete]) –
Delete, no sources, bordeline ad Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:Merge and source could go into Bookkeeping if some sources are there doesnt really have notability for standing alone Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC){{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remote bookkeeping||}}
- Delete no evidence that the mechanics of doing bookkeeping in this way are notable. JJL (talk) 02:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, (X! · talk) · @979 · 22:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC){{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remote bookkeeping||}}
- Merge into Bookkeeping. Not noteworthy enough to stand as a separate subject. • Anakin (talk) 17:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect as either WP:NEO or WP:DICTDEF. I don't see anything notable about this specific mode of bookkeeping. DMacks (talk) 07:21, 21 July 2009 (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.