Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:ExTravelMoney

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:32, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:ExTravelMoney (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Company-motivated advertisement shown clearly by the information and sources, both of which emulate paid press, even if not intended since that's still what it is, the history has shown one particularly motivated user who has a clear involvement, but no signs they made the necessary actions about COI. SwisterTwister talk 04:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure how to endorse this (am I supposed to use a template or is this enough?) but either way I support it and what SwisterTwister said regarding it. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:03, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSandDoctor: Generally, a preference (i.e. !vote) is bolded and followed by a rationale. So in this case, a good way to endorse the opinion of SwisterTwister would be "Delete per SwisterTwister." or "Delete per nom." (using italics instead of bold in my examples so they don't appear like !votes, bold is three apostrophes instead of two; nom is an abbreviation for nominator). One of those would be placed on a new line beginning with a bullet (i.e. "*"), possibly followed by a short statement, and ended with a signature. Many of the ways one may !vote can be viewed at Wikipedia:Deletion process#Common outcomes. Best Regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 13:12, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Godsy: Thanks! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:30, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per SwisterTwister. I agree with SwisterTwister. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:30, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. no hope of ever being an article DGG ( talk ) 06:43, 20 March 2017 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.