Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/De Rosee Sa


 * 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. MelanieN (talk) 01:53, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

De Rosee Sa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Most of the links in article are of PR nature. Not notable architecture firm Arthistorian1977 (talk) 14:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I've taken the basic information from the RIBA website and the AJ Buildings Library as referenced. The additional articles are interesting because they go into more detail on some of the key facts about the buildings. The practice was one of eight across Europe shortlisted for this years Young Architect of the Year Award which is a significant accolade in architectural circles - particularly because the profession is associated with more well established, older practices. Architecturalhistorian (talk) 16:07, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Architecturalhistorian
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


 * leaning to delete something smells off about this article, I'm concerned there's a conflict of interest or single purpose account at play here. Article was previously speedied after creation by a one time account and now has been recreated by another one time account. Hiding T 20:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * See also history and logs of Max de Rosee. Hiding T 20:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * delete without vastly more convincing sources - David Gerard (talk) 21:49, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - I did find some sources in at least semi-reputable sources, so currently undecided. Perhaps a case of WP:TOOSOON, perhaps a case of just barely., , . Yvarta (talk) 23:17, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

My aim is to add as much architectural stuff to Wikipedia as possible - not just about well established practices and people but young ones that are also interesting and relevant. I have only had time to do these so far but will be doing more - so it is not a "one off". A lot of architectural pages on Wikipedia reference news articles and the architects own website (==Zaha Hadid==) - just because it is a news item surely does not mean it is not a reputable source. Surely each should be judged individually. In my experience the Architects' Journal, Dezeen etc are the go to for architectural news and information. Thanks for considering 80.71.4.139 (talk) 12:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Architecturalhistorian


 * delete fundamentally promotional, trying to scrape a WP presence from some scraps. TOOSOON it is. Jytdog (talk) 07:00, 9 September 2016 (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.