Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deolinda Rodrigues Manoel


 * 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. No RS, as almost all comments are mentioning. Delete   Wifione    .......  Leave a message  12:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Deolinda Rodrigues Manoel

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The article was deleted from Wikipedia in Spanish. Google search does not return reliable sources:,. The article was writen by who apparently have written the book which was the source of the article (The author is apparently unknown:  and has written books on Wikisource: Filosofia, pensamentos de pré-conceitos e de pós-conceitos). But, the problem is that Brazilian National Library Foundation (which is reponsible for ISBN register in Brazil) does not find results on the author:. Another source is a homepage which is not a reliable source. The author of the other source cannot be found:. Anyway, it seems to be a non-notable person. Dularion (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions.  —Dularion (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Nominator's only edits thus far is the process of nominating the article and listing. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:29, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Google Search fails to find any reliable sources for this person. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:29, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * keep. 201.81.113.92 (talk) 19:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC) (NOTE: This comment represents the first and only contribution to Wikipedia by User:201-81-113-92)
 * Umm, what is your rationale for your vote? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:54, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per lack of reliable independent secondary sources. Algébrico (talk) 18:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Hard to establish notability in absence of secondary sources VASterling (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2010 (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.