Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/El Comercio de Colorado

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

El Comercio de Colorado

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

Doesn't meet the standards of WP:BASIC Marvellous Spider-Man 03:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete As per WP:NOT. Fails WP:GNG. A single line with no references is just dubious. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:46, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete: Seriously, there isn't no need for such "articles" having one single line with no reference. Delete as lack of WP:NOT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Democratics (talk • contribs) 05:38, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, oppose speedy delete AfD is not the Wikipedia cleanup department. If there is no clear policy or WP:CSD violation, even though there is only the slightest bit of notability of a subject, a lack of references or quality of an article doesn't mean it should be deleted. Although I !vote deletion of the article (this article IMO fails WP:GNG anyway), I oppose speedy deletion in favour of community decision. Wikipedia:Process is important. Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 05:47, 18 September 2016 (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.