Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Indonesia Forum
based on the clear malice of the nomination. This was the third of {{plain link |url=//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Mohsinpathania&namespace=4&newOnly=1 |name=a series of nominations}}—the nominator's first nontrivial contribution to Wikipedia—concerning articles with declared ties to administrators or Wikimedia personnel that began two days after the nominator {{plain link |url=//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/block?page=User:Mohsinpathania |name=was indefinitely blocked at Commons}} as an account "used ''exclusively'' for disruption." The nominator's assertion that an administrator has an undeclared COI is patently false: it's stated on the article's talk page (declared special:diff/655619209|April 9, 2016). Per , we cannot allow our processes to be subverted to exact vengeances.On the merits, I disagree as well. Most likely, the WHOIS "non organization" statement is a translation mistake, a term of art (perhaps for a non-profit or an organization without a significant internal network), or an entry made by a hosting company without the subject's knowledge. Additionally: (1) WHOIS is not a reliable source; (2) WHOIS is insufficient to disprove the organization's existence when weighted against other evidence; and (3) the fact that it's registered suggests that it ''does'' exist. If I write a letter :The Treachery of Images|that asserts that I don't exist, would anyone believe me? Would we delete a BLP as a hoax if its subject posted on her Twitter account that she was a "non-person
— User:Rebbing, 05:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:POINT (Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point)