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. Sr 13 06:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indfrica[edit]

This article appears to contain nothing but speculation by the page creator or any other contributors, none of whom provides either substantial reasons on the discussion page why it should be retained or any reliable references; the only reference provided is to an Orkut profile page for which the reader must log in or register to view. It was proposed for deletion once before; that tag was removed with no explanation on the discussion page. Doonhamer 19:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete - Looks like a hoax. Delete as soon as possible. - R 18:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If this were true, the web (and the entire world) would be buzzing about it. There are no relevant Google matchs for Indfrica at all. - Richfife 19:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as original research and quite probably complete bollocks (always wanted to use that one). This would be rather widely discussed if it was the case. And I suspect some sovereign countries out that way might have an issue or two with the plan... Tony Fox (arf!) review? 20:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- -- pb30<talk> 20:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It should be renamed Bollockistan. Utter fantasy. Clarityfiend 22:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Hoax/nonsense. utcursch | talk 16:02, 13 June 2007 (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.