Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Applicant (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

The Applicant
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails Notability (web). Defunct self published website. I have been unable to find any evidence of Notability. Article creator's edit history shows strong evidence of COI promotion here. Alsee (talk) 14:20, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Alsee (talk) 14:20, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Note: This article may be eligible for speedy delete as recreation of deleted article: unanimously consensus to delete and with the following quote from the nomination: "Article has been deleted after CSD and PROD before, therefore now taking to AfD." Alsee (talk) 14:26, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. There is no evidence to be found anywhere that even acknowledge its existence, let alone its significance. Wikipedia is in trouble if this requires a discussion. Furthermore, it's yet another article by User:Dansong22 which is an undeclared alias of Arun Budhathoki, created solely to publicise himself, ruthlessly misusing wikipedia in the process. Don't be surprised if a 27.34.xxx.xxx IP or Ozar77 show up cursing and threatening, with or without resorting to blanking this page and/or deleting AfD tag on the article. Usedtobecool  TALK  15:57, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, that was disclosed on the talk page of this very article, deleted the last time around. Uncle G (talk) 18:30, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Recreated article that was already removed as a result of the AfD process. Like a few other similar articles currently up for deletion from related  authors, this one also fails to meet WP:NCORP.  There's no WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources.  Orville1974  (talk) 17:25, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed the prior deleted article. Whilst it is very similar content, and I would normally delete it as a re-creation (by the same article creator, indeed), I am inclined to let the AFD process run.  This is for two reasons.  First, as someone else has mentioned, it is possibly useful for people to see all of the articles in this group as the discussion runs.  Second, the prior discussion was about lack of any sources at all.  This was in 2012 and the old article indeed cited almost nothing.  Some of the sources to be taken into consideration now did not exist then. Uncle G (talk) 18:30, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - article as it stands does not meet WP:GNG, lack of coverage in reliable secondary sources.  starship .paint  (talk) 13:12, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * DELETE - Obviously non-notable now and will never be. It doesn't help that the links describe the site as defunct or generate a 404 error without being archived. The name is so generic that it is impossible to find any related links using google (assuming…). ogenstein (talk) 09:20, 11 June 2019 (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.