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. ~ Amory(
u •
t •
c) 13:31, 3 July 2018 (UTC)reply
keep he author is trying to improve the text and adapt it to the rules of Wikipedia, it is worth asking for help — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Elisandroes tores (
talk •
contribs) 15:46, 26 June 2018 (UTC) reply
Delete I see potential in recreation once we get more sources providing the subject pass
WP:GNG.
OccultZone (
Talk •
Contributions •
Log) 02:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)reply
Douverton som: Please motivate: Why do you cross-wiki spam the article to other languages? Even without translating it!--
Aliwal2012 (
talk) 10:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete: this is another sockpuppet from
User:Duccaa. Just watch the pages that he edits (e.g. [Instituto de Ensino Teologico Bíblico do Brasil]) to see that he acts exactly the same way.
Joao Xavier (
talk) 12:03, 30 June 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete: The link to Forbes doesn't work. The two articles linked do not support claims about wealth.
K175 (
talk) 12:12, 30 June 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete as non-notable cross-wiki spam. I'll be cleaning up the other language articles soon.
Hiàn (
talk) 23:44, 30 June 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete - Does indeed seem to be a bogus entry. No Portuguese language article but cross-wiki spam, and supporting sock puppets to vote "Keep".
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 05:36, 1 July 2018 (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.