Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Training in Communication
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Speedy delete G11 by Athaenara (talk · contribs). See Athaenara's closing comment below. (non-admin closure). Cunard (talk) 18:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
International Training in Communication[edit]
- International Training in Communication (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Self sourced article that reads like an advertisment with no evidence of notability or any references, would need considerable effort to make encyclopedic if sources were available. MilborneOne (talk) 23:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete as blatant advertising.--Boffob (talk) 14:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete as blatant advertising, nothing to keep. Theseeker4 (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As per consensus. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete (G11) — I'd rather go watch SPAMalot rather than receive training in communication. (note: I'm just noticing the strong presence of spam, not that I don't like the communication field, just in case someone takes it seriously) MuZemike (talk) 04:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Since everybody seems to be voting for a CSD, I have tagged it as such. DARTH PANDAduel 20:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: while the original stub was created in April 2006 by Westfall, it had been overtly promotional since September 2006 edits by Laurec. — Athaenara ✉ 17:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.