Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nyéléni

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

International Nyéléni Forum for Food Sovereignty[edit]

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

Promotional article under misleading title. Reads like a press release, and is sourced to notices derived from press releases. DGG ( talk ) 07:17, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Looks like this article was created and extensively edited by a user with a conflict of intetrest: Infonyeleni (info + nyeleni). Too bad nobody posted this promotional username at WP:UAA in time to act on it. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. The article's sources aren't reliable as they are mainly press releases. - tucoxn\^talk 01:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved this article to International Nyéléni Forum for Food Sovereignty and made the page Nyéléni about the Malian legend. Apologies if this disrupts the deletion discussion in any way. I have no objection to being reverted if necessary for the sake of this discussion as long as the appropriate (ie. current) titles are restored after its over. Thanks for any assistance necessary and I am sorry for any trouble I've caused. Just trying to fix what's broken and make it right. Candleabracadabra (talk) 03:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as spam. I support Candleabracadabra's action; it seems quite sensible. bobrayner (talk) 03:24, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While a notable cause, the article is merely link span, and the sourcing is truly terrible. I would suggest starting over or userfication. Bearian (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Link span may be something slightly different! :-) bobrayner (talk) 09:15, 23 January 2014 (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.