Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Totzi


 * 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. It was determined that this is not verifiable. Mgm|(talk) 09:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Totzi

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The IP who removed the prod tag sums it up best: "This berry is not well-known so it is not found in any stores. It cannot be found in a dictionary either." A Google search also turned up nothing. This utter lack of verifiability means the subject fails one of the two cornerstones of Wikipedia, and the article should be deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions.  -- &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  17:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd like to ask that this not be closed early. Looking at the article, the existence of this berry sounds very plausible. It is highly likely that it is misspelled, or has various spellings which is making it harder to find references.  If possible, I'd like a few days to do some research on this and see if I can find anything in some of my books about Mexico and the peoples of Mexico.  Thanks! &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  18:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I haven't had the time to do any in-depth research on this, and haven't found any good sources. While my gut tells me this probably exists, I can't do anything to verify it, so I'll have to recommend deletion for now. &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  04:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —  Aitias   // discussion 00:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete given that sources are not given and appear to be difficult to find. It seems to be unverifiable. Capitalistroadster (talk) 05:28, 25 February 2009 (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.