Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ABCs of Attraction


 * 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   redirect to JT Tran. The two first "keep" opinions advocate a merger, three other people recommend deletion as non-notable, and I'm discounting Josh769's opinion as it does not appear to offer any argument. The other opinions can be reconciled with a "redirect", this way anything that's worth retaining can be merged from the history, editorial consensus permitting.  Sandstein  18:00, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

ABCs of Attraction

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Nomination of a page which appears to have little notability and appears to be have been created by sockpuppets to promote the company. Information on the company - which offers 'pick-up artist' tactics - seems to be based on promotional material.

Not only is the topic seemingly non-notable, but it also appears to exist only because of multiple editors (or sockpuppets) with obvious conflict of interest and should be deleted as per WP:SOAP

I am also nominating the following related page due its connection with the topic of this AfD and lack of notability, along with some being written in large part by some of the same group of editors/sockpuppets involved with this article


 * JT Tran

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Paxti (talk • contribs) 17:40, 5 June 2012‎ (UTC)


 * Keep - But cut way the hell back and merge the two articles. Yeah, it's had enough coverage to technically merit notability (no accounting for taste).  Add his name to the fifteen-bazillion name list of guys that have sure fire, can't miss, set in stone rules for dominating the opposite sex. - Richfife (talk) 20:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I cut back the main article significantly. I need to take a breather before looking at JT Tran.  This is disturbing stuff. - Richfife (talk) 04:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep and merge, cut way back and de-peacock and de-spam. JT Tran's PR efforts worked and he got himself covered on multiple, independent news sources, enough to pass WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zad68 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - I've undone the redirect at JT Tran. It's not appropriate to essentially remove the article while it is under an AFD discussion.  I agree the article itself is dreadful, but the content, especially the sources, should be there to assist editors in reviewing for the deletion discussion. -- Whpq (talk) 13:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 03:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete - Non-notable company. Autarch (talk) 20:32, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - the article has now been pruned to only include reliable links and the result is a page which contains no info. Non notable company--Paxti (talk) 19:27, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry Paxti, but you aren't supposed to use bold text saying "delete" if you are also the nominator. I struck the "delete" part of your comment. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 03:40, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 03:40, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. If all those references produce no content the company is non-notable.--Charles (talk) 17:16, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm not sure about the exact rules, but this has been nominated for deletion before recently and it was kept. I'll be working to expand it again from the references, anyway. Josh769 (talk) 18:36, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.