Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rivigo
despite heroic effort by article creator. The sources are just lacking in terms of breadth and depth to show meeting GNG. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, after all, and the subject is just not encyclopedic. If anything, the content is more promotional than when DGG tagged it. |One would think AfC would set higher standards than to loose this upon article space. Nice catch by {{u|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi}} in sending it back to Draft space back when. Not sure  applies-- one need not be "run of the mill" to not meet inclusion requirements for an encyclopedia. {{green|Closing admin, ''nota bene'', does not require SALT. Has NOT been multiply recreated
— User:Dlohcierekim, 18:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SPAM||WP:MILL (Wikipedia:Spam)