Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brazil as a possible emerging great power

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 speedy delete. —Cryptic 11:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil as a possible emerging great power (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Where to start? Crystal-balling (especially with a title like that!), WP:OR, WP:V, duplicate material article - appears to be a re-creation of Brazil as an emerging superpower and Brazil as an emerging great power, both of which were deleted on 21 Oct. This article is a random collection of 'Brazil facts' all of which belong in the various Brazil articles. Xdamr^talk 01:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom Xdamr^talk 01:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The creator of this article put it best in the last AfD: "Ok… I give up. You seems here to be very ignorant to understand… We will see in 2050… João Felipe C.S 23:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)" When this actually happens let's write an article about it, but not before. JChap2007 01:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above and appears to be in essay form. Cbrown1023 02:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if it is substantially identical to previous deleted articles, otherwise plain delete as unverifiable. Kavadi carrier 02:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, but the title should be copied to MOS as an example of what not to do. --Doc Tropics ^{Message in a bottle} 03:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  You mean WP:FREAKY? Or WP:BAI maybe. :-) Kavadi carrier 04:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete as repost. No, no, no. Gazpacho
• Delete as crystalballism. It has been tagged as a speedy by someone else.-- danntm ^T _C 04:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This should be deleted asap. --Terence Ong _{(T | C)} 04:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete as a repost of previously deleted content. Resolute 04:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. 69.177.186.233 06:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete with extreme prejudice. Wareq 07:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. Stammer 10:12, 4 November 2006 (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.