The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 01:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Does not seem to be all that notable. Very large number of quite dubious sources. It looks like the subject of this article has made use of paid publicity to get the article accepted into Wikipedia. Salimfadhley ( talk) 15:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 01:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Does not seem to be all that notable. Very large number of quite dubious sources. It looks like the subject of this article has made use of paid publicity to get the article accepted into Wikipedia. Salimfadhley ( talk) 15:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)