Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nullset

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 redirect to Null set. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nullset

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

Delete because it is unnotable and extremly poorly referenced. Only reference is to a facebook page and a page of which it is only a minor mention reH ghun ghunwI' 00:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect to null set While the "music" group has a quite severe lack of notability, this is a plausible redirect target for students trying to look up the article on the mathematical concept. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect per above. I'm unable to find evidence that this group meets WP:GNG or WP:BAND. Gong show 06:25, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge / redirect to Grand Royal Records - there is reliable source coverage (Billboard, Worcester Telegram and Gazzette) but not enough to pass WP:NMUSIC. Another album or two released on the label would get them over the notability hurdle, but it was not to be. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:51, 13 August 2013 (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.