Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Europe, Middle East, Africa and Latin America

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. postdlf (talk) 18:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Europe, Middle East, Africa and Latin America

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

Unreferenced since 2008 - sounds like an opinion piece rather than a term that is actually widely used. An orphan, nothing links here Gbawden (talk) 12:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even if the expression was in common use the article would still be a dictionary definition only.Kitfoxxe (talk) 14:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to wikt:EALA or wikt:EMEALA. A fair amount of Ghits, but this seems to be a term designating a semi-arbitrary collection of geographical areas, rather than a concept per se. --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 23:29, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:02, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - and not only this but also Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Nonsense. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 12:46, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Davey2010 • (talk) 01:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Ridiculously implausible that anyone would lump Latin America in with the rest, and I don't see anybody doing it. Europe, Middle East and Africa does get a good number of hits, though I doubt it's worth a standalone article, but that's another story (or Afd). Clarityfiend (talk) 03:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Hits are not to a concept, but are arbitrary listings, hence trivial at best. No utility, no notability. Fails WP:GNG by having no in depth discussion. --Bejnar (talk) 04:07, 27 July 2014 (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.