Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fame Fashion and Creative Excellence (FFACE) (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 21:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Fame Fashion and Creative Excellence (FFACE)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Recreation of a previously deleted article. Previous deletion discussion was dominated by sockpuppets and apparently affiliated editors - including the recreator. Speedy notice removed by an ISP. This page was supposed to have been salted against recreation as per previous deletion discussion. Mabalu (talk) 10:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Whilst this has been recreated, it has been recreated with information and reference more appropriate. The deletion tag is absolutely baseless. The notable references include news reviews from IMDB, Washington Bangla Radio, Tollywood Dhamaka, Times of India, Telegraph amongst many others. Admins are requested to review all the references individually in the article to verify its notability. Admins are also requested to search google with the names "FAME FASHION AND CREATIVE EXCELLENCE", "FFACE Calendar", and "FFACE" to see more references on Fame Fashion and Creative Excellence before considering deleting this article. If there are other reasons apart from the ones stated, please specify so that I may arrange the same to be modified or removed/added. Thanks! awesomeme111 18:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomeme111 (talk • contribs)
 * Right, let's see. Essentially everything seems to be promotion for a calendar that was only launched this year. Gomolo describes itself as an IMDB - and IMDB is not considered a reliable source. Many of the "articles" appear to be press-releases or blog posts which do not show editorial input or third party commentary. There is really very little about this venture that currently shows evidence of ongoing notability. It doesn't help that the "Business Standard" article is so badly translated into English as to barely make sense. It does appear that this article is written solely to promote FFACE, and even the articles I'm seeing online are essentially babbling celeb-gossipy stuff or stuff that reads like press releases/advertising/promotion. Sorry, but I'm not convinced that this article is anythng more than "mere spam pushed by advocates," to quote Bearian on the last AFD. Mabalu (talk) 22:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete and salt. I looked again online, just to keep myself honest, and found, only 24 Ghits, none of which matter.  What I mean is, once you take away the PR, social media, and Indian websites, I could not find a single reliable source about the subject. I did additional searches in the Tollywood media, and I didn't find much there, either. This appears to be a fairly new company that has published a couple of model calendars.  I don't see how that could be anything more than run of the mill. Bearian (talk) 23:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Since the brand is based out of India, it is bound to have more of Non- English sources. Non – English sources are also verifiable. Wiki articles should be based on reliable, published sources. I do not understand as quoted by Bearian why would you take away the Indian websites as reliable sources when the brand is based out of India and its bound to have more published articles on Indian mainstream newspapers, magazines, journals and blogs. Obviously personal or group blogs are not reliable sources and none of such are quoted in this article. In response to Mabalu few of the articles do have third party commentary especially the "Business Standard" article has commentary by Bengal’s most successful film director, Raj Chakraborty. There is a huge article on Washington Bangla Radio on FFACE. Ref no 5 on the main article. There is enough notability and reliable third-party sources found on the brand to have a Wikipedia article on this. Ofcourse, there is a difference between press-releases and articles on mainline newspapers. The references provided here are from mainline newspapers published in Kolkata in editorial and not advertisements. There are more articles from “Bengali” mainliners which are not included to minimize Non – English sources. If you want me to add those, happy to do that. awesomeme111 12:07, 17 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomeme111 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a newspaper where it appears to be an promotional and advertisement to me. &#8212;  C ute st Penguin Hangout 16:48, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

1) Business Standard 2) Washington Bangla Radio Internet Report 1 3) Bengali Film online fashion magazine - Gomolo 4) The Calcutta Times - Times of India 5) Ebela News Coverage (Ebela is the sister Concern of the Telegraph) 6) Washington Bangla Coverage 2 7) Tollywood Dhamaka Report 8) IMDB Event Review 9) Hyderabad Deccan English Daily 10) Candid Communication reports — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomeme111 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Please note that Wikipedia is not a newspaper is just an essay. Essays contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. I have provided my support as to why this should be considered as a Wiki article above. Please let me know if you disagree. Please refer to the below news editorials on the brand in online journals, mainline newspapers, online fashion magazine and blogs.

There are many more in regional languages which I can include as references if needed. awesomeme111 19:24, 17 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomeme111 (talk • contribs)
 * I'll grant you that the Times of India cite is good. The others, meh. Bearian (talk) 23:04, 17 September 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.