Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Full Armor of God Broadcast (2nd nomination)
and salt the article. Armorbearer777 is blatantly violating  and  as he is clearly non-neutral on the topic and unable to write in a fully neutrally about it. The broadcast is not any more notable than it was the last time the article was created. TomPointTwo, you make an interesting point, however in this case, this is not just an matter of someone being interested in a local interest or a heavily active and well-experienced editor making careful neutral edits to an article about an organization they are associated with (for example, my adding well sourced history to some of the A&M state agency articles), but someone whose job may be engaging in paid editing (even if the internship is unpaid) by his employer. If Armorbearer777 truly understands the policies and guidelines that have been pointed out to him, he will voluntarily tag his copies for deletion, and accept that if this broadcast ever becomes notable, someone else will create the article is not involved in it and that he should not edit it anymore. However, as he is cross-posting parts of his arguments all over the place, I'd say he really isn't understanding it as much as some think. And yes, policy does prohibit this sort of thing. Wikipedia is  for advertising and creating notability, it violates  and 
— User:Collectonian, 02:03, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:COI||WP:ADVERT||WP:NOT||WP:NOR||WP:NPOV (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest)