Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deljou Art Group


 * 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. Killiondude (talk) 07:20, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Deljou Art Group

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

References are to the subject's own site, mapquest, something blank, and a very niche art expo writeup. A preliminary WP:BEFORE didn't unearth much more. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  04:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unambiguous promotion by an obvious (but undeclared) WP:COI editor. This appears to be exactly the sort of advertisement masquerading as something else ("... not identifiable as advertising to consumers ...", likely to "... mislead consumers into believing [it is] independent, impartial, or not from the sponsoring advertiser itself ...") that is considered "deceptive" – and thus illegal – in the United States under rules laid down by the Federal Trade Commission (some discussion here). Wikimedia projects are governed by American law. We do not tolerate promotion of any kind, and we certainly cannot tolerate promotion that may be illegal. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:27, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - I may have made a mistake in accepting this article via Articles for Creation. I will review it again and offer my revised opinion in one to three days.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - The author has again been asked to declare any conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - the language is highly promotional and even there is a notability, in it's current form the article is beyond salvation. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete for a combination of notability issues and tone issues, and because some of what was in the draft when I accepted it has been redacted as copyvio. I will note that the author has not replied about conflict of interest.  I may have made a mistake on this one.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:47, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete the sources are very sad.198.58.161.137 (talk) 09:27, 16 January 2018 (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.