Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SPOLD
and '''speeedy close''' per such a lack of  that the nominator's bringing this here makes me question his mindset or ability (sorry).  I politely remind that notability guideline tells us that no article ever has to say "this topic is notable because..." as |a topic's notability is found through its sourcability and not through sources actually being used... '''THAT''' would be a matter for |editorial oversight and not deletion.  And come on {{u|SwisterTwister}}... {{tq|"nothing to suggest better"}}... Really??  Sure https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SPOLD&type=revision&diff=689922275&oldid=689721492 what was nominated was not well sourced, but |that is no reason to delete a notable topic, if |actual due diligence shows it as notable. Sorry, and not intended to offend, but what BEFORE did you undertake before making your unfounded statement
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 02:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE||WP:NPOSSIBLE||WP:HANDLE||WP:NPOSSIBLE||WP:BEFORE (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)