Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christine Conix


 * 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   no consensus. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 03:34, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Christine Conix

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article happens to be in sync with its NL/FR counterparts. Only seems to serve self-promotion, unless the subject has any particular notoriety, which seems to escape me. --Midas02 (talk) 11:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. This needed updating - not only future-tense mentions of Expo 2010 but her firm merged with another in 2013 and the listed website is very dead. Also the publicity trail seems to have gone cold (although Google may be being sniffy about showing me back issues of Antwerp and Brussels newspapers). However, the three references that were there are very good, and with them plus a search for the Expo pavilion job I was able to reference the three most stellar commissions mentioned. Notability does not expire. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:31, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree the article has spam issues but the subject is clearly notable, with multiple independent reliable sources focused on her, but there is some WP:REFSPAM in there, plus WP:PRIMARY sources. If the article is kept, I'll try to fix it up when I get time.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:24, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article is autobiographical; Writing an article about oneself can be seen as nothing more than self-promotion. MiracleMat (talk) 08:19, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The subject doesn't seem to have much notability, or to be of general interest. As an architect she will obviously generate some press for her work, but hasn't worked on any landmark buildings. So she is just, with all due respect, 'an' architect. And Wikipedia isn't the yellow pages. Midas02 (talk) 11:58, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
 * With respect, she won the competition to renovate and add to the Atomium, which is a landmarked building, and to design the Belgium (and EU) building at Expo 2010; I take it you missed those? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, § FreeRangeFrog croak 06:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Jim Carter (from public cyber)  10:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - The self promotion is offputting but putting that aside - The notability is there and If I'm honest the article doesn't seem all that promotional anyway. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  13:03, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - AfD is not for cleanup.  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:12, 1 August 2014 (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.