Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Moldova

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. RL0919 (talk) 02:52, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Moldova[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reason Akld guy (talk) 02:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC) Content that comprises nothing about the topic, only a brief sentence about a breakaway from another body. Nothing significant remains of any content added since article's creation in 2005. Akld guy (talk) 02:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 May 4. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:33, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. feminist (talk) 03:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Moldova-related deletion discussions. feminist (talk) 03:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. feminist (talk) 03:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Haven't found any sources of it with a Google search, which turned up such results as an identically-named organization in Egypt. John M Wolfson (talk) 05:22, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nominator. The number of pageviews has averaged 2 for the last three weeks, which are probably bots, so if anyone is going to suggest that it become a redirect to Confederation of Trade Unions of the Republic of Moldova (listed in its See also section), I'd suggest that wouldn't be worthwhile. Akld guy (talk) 05:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Akld guy, If you are the nominator of an article for deletion, your desire to delete it is assumed (unless you specify that you are neutral, and nominating for other reasons). Because of this, you do not get to !vote (that is, for the second time) in your own AfD (WP:GD). Bakazaka (talk) 07:20, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Bakazaka: You are correct, as stated at WP:GD, Miscellaneous advice section. It hadn't occurred to me that the closer would count my proposal among the Deletes, and I'm not entirely certain that all closers do that when tallying up. I've seen iVotes elsewhere by proposers at, for example WP:ANI. The closer in this case should be able to figure it out now that you've drawn attention to it. Thanks. Akld guy (talk) 08:22, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-article with no citations to reliable sources - does not meet WP:GNG or any other guideline - how did this make it into mainspace? - Epinoia (talk) 21:34, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as written. No indicia of encyclopedic notability. I would not object to sending this to draft to see if it gets improved in the next six months, though I am dubious that it would be. bd2412 T 00:41, 11 May 2019 (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.