Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Los Hombres De Negro y los OVNI


 * 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 Fabio Zerpa. (non-admin closure) SST flyer 23:58, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Los Hombres De Negro y los OVNI

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NBOOK JMHamo (talk) 00:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nominator. Edward321 (talk) 00:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 00:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  04:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Fabio Zerpa. It's difficult to source anything that references the paranormal, as they are rarely covered in places Wikipedia would consider reliable. That it's difficult to source anything pre-Internet or wasn't published in English goes without saying, and this book has all three things going against it. It's possible, albeit probably unlikely, that sources do exist out there off of the Internet. I didn't find anything in my searches, but if anyone can provide RS in the future I don't mind this being restored. I do note that Zerpa's article has some issues with notability, so that might need to be looked at as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:30, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect as not seriously needing deletion but also not independently notable. SwisterTwister   talk  07:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  20:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete no reliable sources mentions this book. HealthyGirl (talk) 20:50, 3 May 2016 (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.