Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SHAHIDLIPI (2nd nomination)

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 ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SHAHIDLIPI[edit]

Unnotable language implementation. Over a year after its last AfD, article remains in the same shape with the only "references" being three self-published, non-WP:RS sources, and one dead link. Fails WP:N having no significant coverage in reliable third party sources and article is primarily composed of unverifiable claims. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 05:30, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not notable --Cybercobra (talk) 08:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable. Besides, anything that includes so many {{fact}} tags must go. §FreeRangeFrog 20:07, 4 February 2009 (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.