Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Grogg


 * 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Charles Grogg

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not appear to meet WP:CREATIVE. Does not meet WP:NPROF. Received one award (the Clarence John Laughlin Award) - given out by a regional organization (New Orleans Photo Alliance), neither of which are notable. Note that almost all of the content within the article was added by SPAs in 2010 and 2015 (before undisclosed paid editing was a rule). Risker (talk) 01:47, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Keep. At first I thought this was an automatic keep per WP:ARTIST, as his bio page indicates numerous muusem collections. However I tried to verify these and all attempts failed. At the same time, there are a few reviews along with several sources that are older that would seem likely to make him meet GNG. Pinging, as they might have a relevant and useful opinon, and they have previously edited the article. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:08, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I assume you are referring to his personal website. I removed the data from the article. The "collections" that are referred to are the libraries of those organizations, which have one of his books, or the book about his photography, in their stacks. Risker (talk) 05:49, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Now that I understand how the inflated museum collection claims worked, I am changing to delete. It calls all the good faith claims made by the article into question.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:09, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Even in 2010, we had rules on conflict of interest. Even at that time, paid editing, declared or undeclared,  would have been regarded as conflict of interest. Though we did not usually use COI alone as a reason or deletion, we certainly did use it to establish promotional  intent, and we certainly deleted purely promotional  articles. What we didn't have in 2010 was the present emphasis on examining new articles for this.  But even not looking closely it should have been noticed that the main contributor to the early version was  "PhotoDealer" and to subsequent version "Photoartistcompiler ".  DGG ( talk ) 23:57, 11 September 2019 (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.