Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradley Kay


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 21:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Bradley Kay

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article purports to be about Bradley Kay but is in fact almost entirely about the company SS+K - and the claims of notability are for that company too. When the coat-rack article about SS+K is stripped out, what remains is a seriously under-referenced biography about a businessman who is apparently successful but fails to meet notability guidelines. RichardOSmith (talk) 17:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Agree with nomination.  red dogsix (talk) 17:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , like you, I agree with the nomination and have voted below to delete this article. However, would it be possible for you to clarify your position on the article per WP:PERNOM, so that the closing admin can see the policy-based consensus more clearly? APerson (talk!) 18:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Just edited article to remove SS+K peacocking as noted by RichardOSmith. Skydog10291971 (talk)
 * Moved below nomination statement; added a bolded "Comment:" at the beginning. APerson (talk!) 18:10, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unable to find any sources which establish notability. Fails WP:GNG. APerson (talk!) 18:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly a puff piece solely for advertising. PureRED (talk) 18:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:29, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:30, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:30, 20 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Absolutely non-notable with searches finding nothing better (and one of the links currently included) aside from this at Books and this Adweek 2008 article. SwisterTwister   talk  07:02, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Very non-notable, written like an advertisement. SilverSurfingSerpent (talk) 16:35, 25 May 2015 (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.