Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulio Borgias


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Tulio Borgias

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Yet another attempt to use Wikipedia as a SOAPBOX, this article was created by (now) blocked and locked socks that are part of a paid ring to use several WMF projects as a means for promotion (for more details see meta:Wikiproject:Antispam/Archives/2021/MF Press Global ). In the Portuguese Wikipedia, the article was deleted several times and then salted. Pretty much every single source in the article is non-reliable and/or paid. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 19:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Brazil.  Kacamata!  Dimmi!!! 19:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Internet.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Mostly agree this is fluff, other than the Young Creators Award he won. It has an article, does it make him in any way notable? Media awards in Brazil, I'm not familiar with, at all. Oaktree b (talk) 20:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Oaktree b This is pretty much an internet popularity award created to promote people. In English, the Young Creators Award article was created by a sock which was also part of huge sock ring. Even in Portuguese, I don't think pt:Prêmio Jovem Brasileiro would survive a AfD. The sourcing is just awful. No reliable sources, no in-depth coverage. Kacamata!  Dimmi!!! 20:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Just Delete it then. An "actor" with one appearance in a youtube film isn't what we use for ACTOR, and the rest is spam as explained above. Oaktree b (talk) 20:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll likely nominate that award article for deletion as well, I'll see what I can dig up first before doing so. Oaktree b (talk) 20:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sources are terrible. Without good sources, you can't have significant coverage required for biographies of living persons. The apparent paid editing, which endangers our not-for-profit status, is icing on the cake. In 2007, this could have been excused. In 2023, this situation in untenable. Bearian (talk) 15:39, 3 February 2023 (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.