The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. Closing per obvious consensus. — Aitias // discussion 17:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Einar Riis[edit]

Einar Riis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Unsourced, Google doesn't unearth anything and the article is slanted and clearly there to promote a particular position. Since this doesn't appear to have generated any press coverage this clearly isn't notable. Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I can't even tell what the article is trying to say. If someone can do the needed cleanup quickly then I might change my mind (as far as I can tell, it's impossible to even start thinking about the subject's notability and stuff until the article is put into a legible and comprehensible form) but otherwise I would agree with nom. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I will take nom's word that Google hits do not exist. Then the article is probably a hoax. If this person were real he would seem to be notable by what the article says. Northwestgnome (talk) 16:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a hoax or simply as a non-notable person. After some digging in Google, I couldn't find anything that wasn't derived from this Wikipedia article.  LinguistAtLarge  16:43, 26 December 2008 (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.