Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aarcover

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. Majorly (Talk) 13:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aarcover

Nominate for deletion This article consists of a whole two sentences and has nothing on the significance of this font. Seems not to meet notability requirements.Sumoeagle179 23:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. It needs to be expanded, but this is a reasonably well-known typeface, and appears in most type sample books. —Chowbok ☠ 00:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. 24.169.255.232 01:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - as far as I can tell, it is one of many type faces created out there. If it is widely used, then some form of documentation in the form of reliable sources would be in order. I was unable to google up any, but it's a tough slog through a huge list of links to font archives. Perhaps one of the above editors wo are more familiar with the typeface can assist. -- Whpq 02:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Pending source to establish noteworthiness. Quadzilla99 04:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete per nom. CRGreathouse (t | c) 10:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Chowbok. Ford MF 02:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
• Editors are basing their rationales on the fact that it "needs to be expanded", without showing that it is actually possible to expand this article from stub state. Per Wikipedia:Deletion policy, articles with no possibility for expansion and that will only ever be perpetual stubs may be deleted. Please cite sources to show that there is a possibility for expansion. Not a single source has been cited yet, either in the article or in this discussion. Uncle G 17:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
• I've asked Chowbok to provide some sources in response to Uncle G, please give him a few (3?) days to respond. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non notable typeface; WP:NOT "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information". "Wikipedia is not a directory".--Jeff 20:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, if expandable, per Mgm. And if it is expandable, please expand it, or add sources to prove notability. TheQuandry 21:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. I held off on this one, but while this isn't an ideal article due to it being source-less and stubby. What I would like is an article on the Intecsas industry, and it seems like it has made a lot of fonts. That being said, it doesn't look like a company that is that well-known. I'm torn on the delete/keep thing. (Only 589 results for aarcover and under 1000 for Intecsas make me want to say delete, but I'm a keepist so it's hard for me to say it for some reason on this one). --Wizardman 01:43, 3 January 2007 (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.