Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belen Echandia (2nd nomination)
This nomination is a ridiculous abuse of process. The last AfD was closed as ''keep'' less than a week ago, on the grounds that the company was adequately notable, and any bias in the content could be cured by editing. This new nomination does nothing to address that: it is simple . The anti-Belen lobby cannot simply wheel out a new |SPA every few days to start a new AfD until they get the result they want. If you believe the last AfD was closed incorrectly, eletion review is the way to go, but if your only case is that you don't like the result, you will get short shrift there. Wikipedia is not the place to conduct your feud: whether Belen has an article is not determined by whether as a company it is good, bad, or indifferent, only by whether it meets the |notability standard
— User:JohnCD, 14:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:SPA||WP:D||WP:CORP (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)