House of Romay: These sources do not validate or prove the claims made within the content.  Furthermore, please see major news sources that discredit the information presented on the page and existence of the House of Romay.  Below are the sources discrediting the information on the page.  List https://laexpresion.com.mx/2023/11/15/desacredita-la-existencia-de-la-casa-de-romay-y-el-conde-de-monterroso-por-la-real-academia-matritense-de-heraldica-y-genealogia-ricardo-de-romay/ https://galiciadiario.com/web/frontend_cargar_noticia.php? id_noticia=121300 https://nybreaking.com/the-rise-of-fabricated-aristocracy-house-of-romay-and-ricardo-de-romay/ https://ultimasnoticiasenred.com.mx/local/falsa-nobleza-desmentida-la-casa-de-romay-y-el-senor-de-cadro-por-la-real-academia-matritense-de-heraldica-y-genealogia-en-relacion-con-ricardo-de-romay/ https://www.terra.com.ve/2023/12/fraude-nobiliario-expuesto-la-verdad.html https://www.http.uk.net/2023/12/falsos-aristocratas-desacreditando-la.html https://www.imakinaria.com/2023/12/fraude-y-mentira-de-la-falsa.html Even from WikiCommons: https://commons.m. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diego_de_Romay_Basail-_Fraudsters_and_Obsession_with_Aristocracy.jpg More official documents can be provided upon request.  This page is spreading misinformation through irrelevant and unreliable sources.  -- Daliaxer ( talk ) 17:30, 18 February 2024 (UTC) ( talk • contribs ) [ reply ] Did you follow the instructions exactly at WP:AFD ?  This is not formatted correctly and if you didn't post it to the daily AFD log, then it probably will not be seen by other editors.  And next time, please sign your deletion nominations.  Thank you.  L iz Read!  Talk!  18:35, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions .  Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions .  Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 February 18 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 14:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Spanish WP [37] says "The Romay family ( Galician : Casa do Romay ) is a fictional Spanish house in northern Spain. According to an investigation carried out by the newspaper El Universal , it was created to carry out fraud and falsification of noble titles, where several families are committing fraud by making fraudulent use of said titles. 1 ​2" If that is correct, and the subject meets WP:N , some changes are needed.  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 16:22, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Similar kind of socking and edit-warring is going on over there too.  Someone who can Spanish will have to identify a couple of reliable sources on the topic and give our article a proper reboot.  I suggest that such an editor, if short of time, should comment out the current article and add a good sentence or two to display for the readers in the meantime.  — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:51, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- The very sources put forth to show this is a fraud also show that it meets the GNG.   As my colleague Gråbergs Gråa Sång notes what's called for is not deletion but a rewrite reflecting the fact that the subject is fictional.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 16:33, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The page does not meet WP:N or WP:GNG .  Below is the brief explanation of each source used in the page so far all of which have been unreliable.  source analysis Source 1: is a blog that should be removed as it is unreliable and written by someone who advertises his services.  It doesn't provide any evidence or mention of the House of Romay or their nobility.  Source 2: dead link.  Unable to verify any information regarding the House of Romay or their nobility.  Source 3: A book written in 2006 that briefly mentions Vasco de Romay, who was the husband of Doña Ginebra de Araujo.  However, it doesn't provide any evidence of the House of Romay being noble or prominent.  Source 4: Only states that Diego de Romay constructed the body of ships and façade of a church in 1670.  No evidence or mention of the House of Romay being noble.  Sources 5: A book written in 1997 where no information regarding the House of Romay or their nobility was found.  Sources 6: A book written in 1984 that doesn't mention anything about the House of Romay or their nobility.  Sources 7: A book written in 2003 that doesn't mention anything about the House of Romay or their nobility.  Source 8: A dictionary-like book that describes Romay as a field of red, gold, and silver, with its paws holding two fig tree leaves.  However, it doesn't provide any evidence of the House of Romay being noble or prominent.  -- Daliaxer ( talk ) 16:57, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Striking duplicate !vote -- your nom already registered your preference for deletion.  You don't get to weigh in twice.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Central and Adams ( talk • contribs ) Delete This article has been written by Diego de Romay, who is a known scammer according to major news outlets.  The article proves nothing and has no sources that can substantiate and validate the information present in it.  Following are the sources that do not validate the content present in this article: list https://www.amazon.com/Fake-Aristocrats-Investigation-Nonexistent-Ancestors-ebook/dp/B0CQT9TN2S? dplnkId=b153d89e-0b97-4557-8c42-31053d5f4c66&nodl=1 https://strongufabet.biz/the-rise-of-fabricated-aristocracy-house-of-romay-and-ricardo-de-romay/ https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/204252845-fake-aristocrats https://www.xinxii.com/childrens-ebooks-730/young-adult-759? product_id=521675 https://todosmisapuntes.com/2023/10/entre-mentiras-y-nobleza-ficticia-el-desmantelamiento-de-la-casa-de-romay-y-ricardo-de-romay/ -- Elene13 ( talk ) 17:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Major Mexican newspaper does six page investigation discrediting them and calling them frauds: [38] More sources discrediting the Romay Family as fake: list https://www.ukinsider.co.uk/education/discrediting-the-existence-of-the-house-of-romay-and-its-false-noble-titles-ricardo-de-romay/ https://uknewswallet.co.uk/fashion-and-lifestyle/false-nobility-exposed-ricardo-de-romays-titles-and-the-house-of-romay-do-not-exist/ https://lanotita.com/el-fraude-de-la-casa-de-romay-y-los-titulos-nobiliarios-inexistentes-del-conde-de-monterroso-ricardo-de-romay/ https://www.parpix.es/entre-mentiras-y-obsesion-por-pertenecer-a-la-aristocracia-diego-de-romay-y-ricardo-de-romay/ https://www.ideporpalencia.es/la-falsa-nobleza-las-mentiras-y-fantasias-de-diego-de-romay-y-ricardo-de-romay/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.50.141.129 ( talk ) Delete Other than being a source of misinformation, this article compounded with that of its Spanish counterpart doesn't just invoke WP:N and WP:GNG as already highlighted but also goes as far as to encourage original research at this point.  This cat-and-mouse chase only ends when this article gets recreated by someone at some point and passes through current regulatory standards.  Besides, the majority of the refs at this point, refer to the lack of credibility regarding their own existence.  Virtualmistik ( talk ) 22:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Notability isn't based on the sources in the article, it's based on the sources in the world.  Encouraging original research isn't a deletion criterion.  It's perfectly fine if the sources say that the subject is fictional.  We have plenty of articles on fictional subjects.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 22:24, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note I have modified comments from multiple editors, changing spacing and indenting in a few comments and collapsing the lists of external links to make this more readable.  I have unstruct the ! votes from Elene and the IP.  Participations in this AFD are suspicious but they need to be blocked before the votes are struck if the votes are to be disqualified.  Signed a few unsigned posts.  Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The entire article contains incorrect information and cites unreliable or dead sources.  Many articles have exposed them as liars.  Including the Ministry of Justice and Spanish Nobility have discredited them.  There is a whole book on them being fake: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/204252845-fake-aristocrats Letters from Ministry of Justice in Spain and Spanish Nobility discrediting them: https://commons.m. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diego_de_Romay-Basail_-_The_Fake_Aristocrat_and_the_Nonexistent_House_of_Romay.jpg https://commons.m. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diego_de_Romay-Basail_-_debunked_by_Spanish_Nobility_and_Ministry_of_Justice_in_Spain.jpg And other sources: https://laexpresion.com.mx/2023/11/15/desacredita-la-existencia-de-la-casa-de-romay-y-el-conde-de-monterroso-por-la-real-academia-matritense-de-heraldica-y-genealogia-ricardo-de-romay/ https://galiciadiario.com/web/frontend_cargar_noticia.php? id_noticia=121300 https://www.ukinsider.co.uk/education/discrediting-the-existence-of-the-house-of-romay-and-its-false-noble-titles-ricardo-de-romay/ https://nybreaking.com/the-rise-of-fabricated-aristocracy-house-of-romay-and-ricardo-de-romay/ https://ultimasnoticiasenred.com.mx/local/falsa-nobleza-desmentida-la-casa-de-romay-y-el-senor-de-cadro-por-la-real-academia-matritense-de-heraldica-y-genealogia-en-relacion-con-ricardo-de-romay/ Mopertcasocp ( talk ) 02:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] TNT delete - my assessment of the available sources is that we currently have no credible citations that discuss the House of Romay as a real noble house.  Unfortunately, the available sources calling it a hoax are also weak: a collection of  articles in tabloid and local papers which are far from high quality RS for history.  The one (relatively) higher quality source cited would be the article in El Universal .  Unfortunately, the article appears to have been unpublished, as despite having been put online only this month (see internal search results ) it is currently inaccessible.  Without a single solid secondary source on either side of the hoax debate, deletion seems to be our only option.  If El Universal ever republishes a relevant piece, or if this draws the attention of other high-circulation newspapers and/or academic publications, we may be able to write an article then.  signed, Rosguill talk 14:35, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ( edit conflict ) as an unacknowledged hoax.  None of the individuals linked to is referred to by the title in their own independent articles, for example, while there is no House of Romay aligning with any of the official, linked offices.  The only pages to mention them ar WP mirrors and blogs, and nothing in the literature .  A thorough search of the relevant scholarship reveals no trace whatsoever: The European Nobility, 1400-1800 , Sex, Gender, and Illegitimacy in the Castilian Noble Family, 1400-1600 , nobility&f=false Blood, Land and Power: The Rise and Fall of the Spanish Nobility and Guardianship, Gender, and the Nobility in Early Modern Spain , for example.  An important noble house would get at least a footnote in history.  But they do not.  TNT this, as it contains no information about the real article and therefore no history worth salvaging to merge— House of Romay hoax , etc—and is misinforming the WP:READER.  Indeed, with its references to living people, it probably amounts to a BLPVIO in parts.  ——Serial 14:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as a WP:HOAX as per statements of others above.  ASmallMapleLeaf ( talk ) 17:22, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Maybe hang it on the wall too depending on outcome of this AFD.  ASmallMapleLeaf ( talk ) 17:28, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Nevermind (see immediately below) ASmallMapleLeaf ( talk ) 20:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete solely based on lack of notoriety, but disagree on hoax.  These articles, as pointed above, are all very disreputable publications, without sources and an evident personal tone.  The only reputable one, El Universal, took it down less than a week after being published.  Besides that I invite people to look at the Talk page, where I originally posted the findings of a light research based on some vandalisms by user @ Giganoto48 .  The page was then protected to allow discussion, and user @ Mopertcasocp began attacking me for posting my findings, accusing me of being the subject and other very personal remarks -- I naturally walked away.  I now see that every user here pushing for this family to be presented as a fraud in this debate have apparently been blocked as sock puppets of @ Mopertcasocp , see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Elene13 .  Do r eview the research in the Talk Page a while back, before I stopped helping this page, which includes National Archive of Spain and National Nobility Archive information on the Romay family, including two family trees etc.  So, it is most certainly not a hoax, and I get the feeling this notion is a personal attack to make them look as such?  Who knows.  That said, it is however perhaps not meeting WP:GNG , so deletion is a possibility.  Benzeneshamus ( talk ) 18:35, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I will paste the info I had gathered before, for easier reference: Spain's National Archive grants digital access to its database.  I did a quick search and found the following documents held in Spain's National Archive:  1) " Genealogical Tree of the Romay family: from Juan de Romay down to Antonia de Romay (married to Lorenzo de Puga) "  ( http://pares.mcu.es/ParesBusquedas20/catalogo/description/12670510?nm , Government of Spain, Historical Archive of the Nobility)  2)  " Genealogical Tree of the Romay family: from Basco de Romay to Catalina Sarmiento de Valladares, II Marchioness of Valladares (married to García Ozores López de Lemos Noguerol, IV Count of Amarante). (http://pares.mcu.es/ParesBusquedas20/catalogo/description/12671470?nm Government of Spain, Historical Archive of the Nobility) Clearly not an invention and distinguished enough to have two family trees in the Historical Archive of the Nobility. I don't see any claims of a living person on this current page claiming any titles, which confuses me as that seems to be the main issue. I do agree that they perhaps are not relevant enough for inclusion in wikipedia, which is why I voted "delete". The two emails , one from the National Archive in the Ministry of Justice and the other from Diputación de la Grandeza (which from what I read is not the "Spanish Nobility", that is a group of nobles, but an official regulatory body that catalogues titles and their holders), are simply replying to a query asking if the Romay family holds certain titles in Spain. The answer is a clear no from both, but it doesn't make any reference, let alone comment on anyone pretending, nor does it discredit the family's relevance or history . Perhaps some of you don't speak Spanish, but please review. What confuses me, is that several users here, @ Daliaxer @ Mopertcasocp @ Virtualmistik @ Elene13 , (all now blocked sock puppets) appear to push that the letters discredit the family and call it a fraud. @ Jpgordon has now protected the page in an edit that I believe to be quite unethical and potentially defamatory, stating that the family "was created for the purpose of fraud and forgery" in the introduction. Surely a non potentially defamatory version should be protected instead, until the evidence is reviews by all? Benzeneshamus ( talk ) 18:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] See WP:THEWRONGVERSION . --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 19:09, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Indeed, that is why I did not edit it to allow for the arguments I presented above. I believe they are ample and sufficient to indicate this version should not be protected. Benzeneshamus ( talk ) 19:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Apologies about the revert, I am always concerned when an editor takes a sledgehammer and erases a large part of the article, and in this case missed out on potentially defamatory content that  @ Benzeneshamus removed when I analysed his edits. I was concerned about erasure of sources, and it was definitely not my intention to back up a WP:NOTHERE user welding a sockpuppet network. Also, excellent work, that is one of the best efforts I've seen from any editor to verify a hoax is true or not. I applaud you 👏 ASmallMapleLeaf ( talk ) 20:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not a hoax, but not notable either way. Drowssap SMM 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Currently working on Netflix series titled 'Lord Swindler'. The sheer creativity displayed in concocting numerous names, titles, ancestors, palaces, and narratives is truly commendable and deserving to watch. To claim oneself as the 47th Count or 44th Lord, despite the fact that Spain's oldest title only dates back to the 22nd, is a testament to the vivid imagination at play here. As I delve into some of the earlier versions of this page from 2019, I stumbled upon edits by user @DiegodeRomay that said: “The Romay family is recognized by their ancestors, who were kings of Spain and France, and who are currently one of the most important and powerful families in Spain.” “Don Ricardo de Romay y Hernandez-Chazaro, 44th Count of Monterroso, 47th Señor de Cadro and Monterroso, who succeeded the head of the family in 2018 and is one of the most influential people in Spain. He lives with his family at the Palace of Cadro . Its construction dates from the 13th century, its tower from the 15th century and the rest of the palace from the 18th century. The name "Don Juan de Romay, Count of Monterroso and Señor de Cadro" is inscribed on the main entrance.”  This whole hoax is insane and twisted. Who in their right mind would claim that Ricardo lives in the Palace and belongs to one of the most current influential Spanish families? There was a whole investigation done on this family and every sentence they have ever said was not true. The sheer audacity to come up with so many made-up names and outrageous stories is mind-blowing. This whole fabricated saga is so wild that it definitely deserves its own movie. I'm writing this up into a script just waiting on more testimonies from witnesses. So please don’t delete this page! @HouseofRomayhoax should be made or merged. @ ASmallMapleLeaf @ Benzeneshamus @ Central and Adams @ Cyberbot I @ Gråbergs Gråa Sång @ DrowssapSMM Mariechristineh ( talk ) 21:18, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This major academy in Spain calls the House of Romay “nonsense”,  the “Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y Genealogía en España” ( https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Academia_Matritense_de_Heráldica_y_Genealogía ) referring to them as "disparate," which means "nonsense" on page 25: http://www.ramhg.es/images/stories/pdf/boletin/boletin-126-127.pdf The House of Romay claims to be from Galicia, Spain and the local newspaper in Galicia debunks them: https://galiciadiario.com/web/frontend_cargar_noticia.php?id_noticia=121300 Yes, I agree that the sources supporting the hoax of House of Romay's claims are weak. However, it is important to note that this family is considered irrelevant to major newspapers, which makes finding larger sources challenging. The Romay name is not a known name in Mexico or Spain, and newspapers like El Universal have shown little interest in preserving articles related to this matter. For example, this topic only made it to a weekly "tendencias" section in El Universal. This was the article: https://web.archive.org/web/20240209193517/https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/tendencias/mexicanos-que-utilizan-titulos-espanoles-nobiliarios-falsos-casa-de-romay/?outputType=amp I believe we should create a page discussing the “House of Romay hoax”. Here’s why: Please review all the topics on the talk page to see how every single sentence was a lie designed to deceive others into believing they had noble and royal origins. Additionally, take a look at the old versions of this page going back to a few years to see how it was excessively exaggerated and fabricated, even going so far as to claim fictional characters ran the Royal Habsburg-Romay House and that the Romay family owns the Magdalena Palace inherited in 1995 (palace owned by Spanish royal family) and Palace of the Kings of Navarre of Olite since 1937 (a national monument). There is a whole book on this Romay hoax on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Fake-Aristocrats-Investigation-Nonexistent-Ancestors-ebook/dp/B0CQT9TN2S?dplnkId=b153d89e-0b97-4557-8c42-31053d5f4c66&nodl=1 @ Benzeneshamus , Regarding the two letters mentioned, one of them is indeed from the official Spanish nobility website’s email and the other is from the Ministry of Justice of Spain. If you visit the contact pages of both official websites and submit a message, you will receive a reply from these two emails. Official Spanish nobility website: https://www.diputaciondelagrandezaytitulosdelreino.es/contacto/ . And Ministry of Justice in Spain: https://www.mjusticia.gob.es/BUSCADIR/ServletControlador?apartado=buscadorGeneral&tipo=RC&lang=en_gb Both of them claimed the Romay family did not have noble titles or any noble origins: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diego_de_Romay-Basail_-_The_Fake_Aristocrat_and_the_Nonexistent_House_of_Romay.jpg https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diego_de_Romay-Basail_-_debunked_by_Spanish_Nobility_and_Ministry_of_Justice_in_Spain.jpg An example of falsehoods still remaining on the page is: “Jose Sarmiento Valladares Arines de Romay” (1643-1708), 1st Duke of Atrisco, 40th Viceroy of New Spain “Romay” is not the Duke of Atrisco's second last name. This has been said in many news articles. Don José Sarmiento Valladares was the son of Gregorio Sarmiento de Valladares and Juana Sarmiento y Niño de Castro. He was the grandson of Luis Sarmiento de Valladares and Inés de Arines Troncoso y Romay, and the great-grandson of Juan de Arines Troncoso and Ginebra Núñez de Romay. Don José Sarmiento Valladares, who was a viceroy and knight of the Order of Santiago, never used the surname Romay of his great-grandmother, which would be his sixth last name. Additionally, there is no evidence that the great grandmother belonged to a house called House of Romay. Also this individual was not a “Romay” who also still remains on the page: José Alfonso Correa Cortés de Mendoza Ozores de Sotomayor y Romay, Count. He was the son of Don Alonso Correa Ozores de Sotomayor Alemparte Oya y Silva, Lord of Casa do Pegullal, and Dona Leonor Cortés de Mendoza y Sotomayor. He was also the maternal grandson of Don Juan Cortés de Mendoza and Dona Aldonza de Romay y Varela. His sixth last name was Romay. There are no known nobles with the surname Romay. While the Duke of Atrisco and José Alfonso Correa Cortés de Mendoza did have the name Romay through the female line, their connection to the Romay lineage was separated by six degrees. It is also worth noting that the military rank of Captain, held by Ramon Romay, does not confer noble status. Additionally, given that Romay is a fairly common surname, it is uncertain whether these three individuals were even distantly related. There is no historical evidence to support their affiliation to a noble house called Romay. Local sources: https://laexpresion.com.mx/2023/11/15/desacredita-la-existencia-de-la-casa-de-romay-y-el-conde-de-monterroso-por-la-real-academia-matritense-de-heraldica-y-genealogia-ricardo-de-romay/ https://nybreaking.com/the-rise-of-fabricated-aristocracy-house-of-romay-and-ricardo-de-romay/ https://ultimasnoticiasenred.com.mx/local/falsa-nobleza-desmentida-la-casa-de-romay-y-el-senor-de-cadro-por-la-real-academia-matritense-de-heraldica-y-genealogia-en-relacion-con-ricardo-de-romay/ https://www.ukinsider.co.uk/education/discrediting-the-existence-of-the-house-of-romay-and-its-false-noble-titles-ricardo-de-romay/ @ ASmallMapleLeaf @ Benzeneshamus @ Central and Adams @ Cyberbot I @ Gråbergs Gråa Sång @ DrowssapSMM @ Mariechristineh Limbonesao ( talk ) 01:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I find it concerning that the archived El Universal article was published with a collective Redacción byline, whereas all other articles in the same Tendencias section of the paper, even exceedingly trivial ones like horoscopes ( [39] ), have clearly-identified authors. I think this further emphasizes that there is something out of the ordinary with this article and it should not be considered a reliable source until El Universal decides to republish it. The other links are all sources previously considered and described as tabloids. signed, Rosguill talk 14:39, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The answer to that question is simple. The horoscopes article won't get you killed in Mexico. Over the past few years, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) documented the tragic killings of at least 52 journalists in Mexico. Therefore, there are strict laws protecting the rights of journalists and freedom of speech. In cases where articles are deemed controversial, they are usually published anonymously or under the name "redacción". To delve deeper into this matter, I contacted El Universal today and conducted an interview with an editor who has been in touch with the Romay family (who will now be featured in my Netflix series). According to the editor, the Romay family has allegedly sent dozens of threatening emails and claims of "defamation".  It is worth mentioning that Mexico does not have any defamation laws.  So their threats to no where.  Furthermore, the aforementioned article did not contain any insults or defamatory remarks directed towards the Romay family.  Instead, it was an academic and genealogical investigation supported by dates, facts, and credible sources, aimed at debunking the noble titles and existence of the House of Romay.  It seems that the Romay family has gone to great lengths to conceal their falsehoods.  Even hiring a reputation company in London, who has no idea about Mexican laws and rights.  Moreover, the article also did not constitute invasion of privacy, as the Romay family willingly made their lives public by creating Wikipedia pages in an attempt to deceive others into thinking they had noble and royal origins and lived in palaces.  So they put themselves in this whole hoax.  Mariechristineh ( talk ) 03:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete