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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:35, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Año/Cero (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to have enough coverage in reliable sources. Plus, looking at its website, it is just sprouting conspiracy theories. So, per verifiability, this article should be deleted. RileyBugz^会話_投稿記録 23:15, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete We need references to significant coverage in impeccably reliable sources to establish the notability of a fringe journal/website. I can't find any but read Spanish poorly. I would reconsider if anyone finds solid references. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:22, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. L3X1 (distænt write) 03:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. L3X1 (distænt write) 03:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Non notable cult reporting journal. L3X1 (distænt write) 03:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per above. = paul2520 (talk) 17:17, 15 December 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.