Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/URBR


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:27, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

URBR

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Clear and cut case of no better notability and improvement and I found nothing better than the usual music websites and their social media hasn't been updated since 2013 with their website also closed thus suggesting this no longer exists...as well this being speedy and PROD material. SwisterTwister  talk  07:08, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:10, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:10, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:10, 24 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. There's as little content in the article as there is punctuation in the nomination. —&#8288;烏&#8288;Γ (kaw), 07:28, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * delete - self-published sources, non-notable. DangerDogWest (talk) 07:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Struck content from confirmed sock above, per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. North America1000 03:41, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  18:38, 31 October 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  17:43, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. I didn't find any sources that could be used to improve the article. I don't really think it's speedy material (if it was, why bring it to AfD?), but then I don't really know what "case of no better notability and improvement" means. Sources, if they exist, are likely to exist in Brazillian media, but I didn't find much from a Portuguese Google search either. --Michig (talk) 20:40, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep It is not because there is no English source that there is source. (My Portugese is not that good ;)) warpozio (talk) 16:23, 9 November 2015 (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.