Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Lifestyle Awards


 * 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. Due to the low participation, this is a soft delete, and the article can be undeleted through a request at WP:REFUND. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 12:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

London Lifestyle Awards

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

fails WP:GNG. an award that is mainly reported in TNT (magazine) which is a free, heavily advertising based publication and not really a reliable source. LibStar (talk) 06:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment While I have my doubts about the article, I assume there is no doubt that the awards were given and that the article accurately reflects this. If that is the case I would not want to be too worried about thesourcing of the information.  A much more pertinent question is whether the awards are notable.  Not being a Londoner, I do not feel qualified to judge.  If we were dealing with a category, I would be calling for it to be "listified and then deleted", which would lead to the creation of an article such as this!  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 13:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete If the awards were important they would be more reliably reported.  DGG ( talk ) 00:32, 10 October 2012 (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.