Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syndication format family tree

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. –MuZemike 02:48, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Syndication format family tree

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

WP:OR, virtually no content. It can't reasonably be redirected anywhere, as this is an obscure search term. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As a layperson, I can't tell what this article is about, I have gained no knowledge by reading it. No references whatsoever. 78.26 (talk) 06:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and 78.26. However, if this is something meaningful, I would not object to it being merged to another page where it would appear in context. Whatever this is, though, it's probably not a topic unto itself; more likely it's an illustration of information about another topic. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:35, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 16:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. A useful diagram could be created for this, but you'd need to start from scratch. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:47, 15 November 2011 (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.