Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flesher Andrew


 * 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. and SALT. Ping me for G4 if recreated. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:14, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Flesher Andrew
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Self-written -- and wrongly titled -- vanity bio/personal advert of a minor interior designer. Calton | Talk 20:18, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, delete and delete. also, WP:NOTPROMOTION WP:NOTFACEBOOK WP:NOTLINKEDIN --VitalPower (talk) 20:46, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong delete, preferably speedy, since WP:G4 (and WP:GAME) applies, per Articles for deletion/Andrew Flesher. Kleuske (talk) 21:16, 11 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - G4 doesn't apply; the content of the article is different from the previously deleted version. ansh 666 22:17, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Bull. It's at this title because the real title was salted against re-creation. Less bureaucracy and more common sense, please. --Calton | Talk 07:49, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter what title it's at, it could be at Chicken pot pies are delicious and it'd still be declined. The only thing that matters for G4 is content. ansh 666 07:53, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Bureaucratic bullshit. The CONTENT was salted against re-creation. What part of the purpose of SALTING was unclear? What part of "undoing another administrator's action" -- which is what you are, implicitly, doing -- was unclear? Especially since, for this to remain, it must be at its genuine title, Andrew Flesher. Would you care to move it so you can -- instead of implicitly -- officially and overtly override another admin's action? --Calton | Talk 08:03, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTPROMOTION applies to speedy delete. --VitalPower (talk) 23:16, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to breach the Wikipedia article creation guidelines. This article was not created by the subject. The contents of the page have been modified and all promotional and vain statements removed. Kindly reconsider the speedy deletion decision.IreneVictor (talk) 23:56, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 11:44, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 11:44, 12 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Per everything above. When an article subject is SALTed, recreations of it are meant to be deleted and SALTed without delay - no matter what the title. I don't know if there's an actual policy that has prevented this from happening here, but if there is - WP:IAR. Exemplo347 (talk) 18:43, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Bypasses the salt applied by using another naming convention. The article is largely WP:PROMO reading like a LinkedIn page. --  Dane  talk  19:31, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Since I protected the Andrew Fisher page, I won't !vote here. Just to note that the page should have been speedied as an attempt to avoid my salting, rather than waste people's time here, and to note that IreneVictor has not yet replied to a conflict of interest request on her user page, despite her editing pattern suggesting that she has one. Saying she isn't him is clearly less than full disclosure Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:08, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * More I've just salted Draft:Andrew Flesher, deleted another sandbox version and blocked another sock Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  12:07, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Note The creator of the article has declared that they have been paid to create the article. Destroy it with fire. Exemplo347 (talk) 15:25, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above, salt etc.; as an exercise in bureaucracy this AfD seems exemplar. —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 11:37, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * delete and salt. I agree that it should have been speedied. --bonadea contributions talk 11:44, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. For all the many reasons already enumerated above. Plus
 * Almost all references cited in article fail WP:IRS standards:
 * Ref #1 is at HGTV.com but it's part of a listing of literally hundreds of design professionals found at: . I'm not sure how this helps to prove notability or aspects of WP:BIO or WP:GNG.
 * Ref #1 and Ref # 7 are described differently as sources in the article but are the same thing.
 * Ref #2 is to the Franklin Report, which is a referral-service like "Angie's List".
 * Ref #3 is actually reliable, a good ref from a major Minneapolis paper.
 * Ref #4 is a summation of an article that apparently appeared at "LoftLife" - which doesn't exist anymore. So, instead of being able to actually reference the original article we have to rely on a summation, a source removed from the original...
 * Ref #5 is a real estate company's blog.
 * Ref #6 is, again, a type of "Angie's List" referral service where the "top people" in various businesses are picked/listed..
 * Ref #8 is apparently a promo piece and not a standalone magazine of any repute - it's just a listing of interior designers in New York City and is NOT the well-known House & Garden (magazine).
 * And subject fails all aspects of WP:CREATIVE. Shearonink (talk) 12:18, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Prediction Years from now, this AfD will be used as a test question at Admin candidate discussions. Take notes. Exemplo347 (talk) 13:09, 15 May 2018 (UTC)note
 * Given the increasing difficulty of becoming an admin, I would imagine that years from now a brain scan and genetic analysis will probably be required over simple questioning.104.163.137.171 (talk) 06:48, 17 May 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.