Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love Systems (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) 10:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Love Systems
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Seemingly non-notable company that offers seminars on seduction/"pick-up artist" tactics. Most information I can find on the company appears to be promotional material, or from some entity that is affiliated with LS in some form or another.

This article was nominated to AfD in March 2008 with result of "delete". In Jan 2009 it was recreated in deletion review after supposed improvements by User:Coaster7. This user was found in Nov/Dec 2009 to be a sockpuppet of a user continuously making COI edits relating to Love Systems and Nick Savoy under multiple usernames.

Not only is the topic seemingly non-notable, but it also appears to exist only because of multiple editors (or sockpuppets) with obvious conflict of interest. scooteytalk 05:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages due to their connection with the topic of this AfD and lack of notability, along with some being written in large part by some of the same group of editors/sockpuppets involved with this article:
 * (previously deleted but later recreated: Articles for deletion/Savoy, Nick)


 * Comment Agree it's probably not notable. Will look more tomorrow, but on Highbeam the only RS I see is this economist article and it's not that detailed.  Note that I'm not sure if editors without HB access can see that link, so if not I'll find a link to the main source.  S Æ don talk  06:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm not sure if the Mystery guy is considered notable or not, but I just did a lot of trimming on his article, removing the primary sources and an unproven claim that he popularized the term "peacocking". The only source in the article that mentions it (a Salon article) doesn't really say that he popularized it, just that he uses the term, which does not automatically mean that he popularized it. There's a lot of dead links on the article as well, but I'll try to see what I can find.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Love Systems Doesn't appear notable from the sources provided. The article is clearly being used to promote the company and what I assume are franchises. --Ronz (talk) 16:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Nick Savoy Doesn't appear notable outside Love Systems. If he's notable for anything, it's the persistent marketing of himself and his company. I don't think this should result in a Wikipedia article on him given WP:SOAP and WP:NOTDIARY. --Ronz (talk) 16:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment It would be helpful to examine all the articles in Category:Seduction_community, most of which have the same or similar problems, so as not to look biased. --Ronz (talk) 19:52, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. I haven't gone through a lot of the "seduction" articles, but happened upon this one and it caught my eye (especially because of the problems with sockpuppets/COI). It looks like at least a few of them are either non-notable or not written from neutral POV. With some exceptions, a lot of the ostensible "notability" for these "pick-up artists" would be because of excessive marketing of their services. Nonetheless I can see why this industry might be prone to shameless self-promotion... scooteytalk 20:48, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:44, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Mystery Seems more notable than both Love Systems and Nick Savoy because of Mystery's role in The Pickup Artist (TV series). --Ronz (talk) 07:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Is there a status where the article can be sent to be better sourced? As I recall, Love Systems has had plenty of mainstream media attention, including:
 * Dr Phil Show, "Women Beware"
 * Tyra Banks Show, "Bro Code"
 * Fox News
 * Boston Globe, "Learning Their Lines"
 * ABC Nightline, forgot the episode title but it caused a lot of controversy
 * Globe & Mail, several times on relationships
 * Playboy (very recently)
 * Nick Savoy was a paid consultant to the VH1 show The Pickup Artist
 * ABC (Australia) Choose Your Own Adventure
 * And many many many others, I see a list here at www.lovesystems.com/media and I know that's not reputable and could be slanted but these pieces could be tracked down in their originals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.13.74 (talk) 21:20, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * — 64.183.13.74 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep Disagree with deletion. Although I agree with some of the points about entries on the pick up industry I feel the fact he writes for playboy on dating science makes this entry more relevant than that of other 'dating gurus'. Also his book 'Magic Bullets' seems to be well regarded in the 'dating community'. --Paxti (talk) 20:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC) — Paxti (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep Disagree with deletion.  Not only through basic research can you find numerous videos on youtube and other main stream media outlets, Their knowledge has been shown to improve the skills of men who seek and practice their teachings. Though some people may have moral objections to the aspect of a Pick up artist, the premise is NOT to trick woman but to present yourself in a light that shows attraction to your characteristics. It is a positive reinforcement of your inner game as well as your self confidence and personal well being. These positive traits that they teach have an outward effect on how men interact in society as well as in.

They have had very well thought and balanced looks in their products and teachings. Las vegas weekly "Sympathy for the skeezy" Not only does it talk about the inner teachings but about the media presence Love Systems and Savoy have as well.

Playboy has had 4 articles on their website promoting the teachings of love systems and Savoy with over 23,000 views combined is the link to all 4 articles for the past 2 months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggcas (talk • contribs) 17:20, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * — Greggcas (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete Agree with deletion. This as well as many seduction community articles are obvious promotional pieces for companies products and nothing more. --liddy64 15:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * — liddy64 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment How is it a promotional piece when it isn't trying to get you to buy any of the products? It gives information about what they are but never encouraging you to purchase these items. The books are goods and the workshops are services. Saying that they are "obvious promotional pieces" has little to no merit
 * An article can be promotional without directly trying to sell a product. See WP:NPOV.   S Æ don talk  21:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Beyond the semantics and exact definition, anyone knows that web traffic is important to companies like this, and links on wikipedia are important for them to maintain said traffic for promotion and search engine indexing. This article itself gives search terms and links to sites that do indeed try to get you to buy products from lovesystems. In contrast an article about a tv actor from a series in 1954 would be added for historical reference with no links to sites where he sells copies of the said show for profit. And if removed would not be then argued in favor of by proven sockpuppets. It is a moral issue of the quality of wikipedia, not a legal specific wording definition (which is not required for deletion of non notable articles from this wiki) that my complaint and agreement for removal is based on.--liddy64 1:46, 02 Jun 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Did not find substantial coverage by independent sources.  S Æ don talk  21:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Each article nominated for deletion should have its own AFD. Note that my delete !vote above only applies to Love Systems with no comment at all on Nick Savoy or Mystery.  I suggest the OP renominate those pages with their own AFDs as unless an editor here specifically comments on the ancillary pages, their !votes will not be considered to be "blanket" keeps or deletes.  S Æ don talk  21:40, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Simply on merit of sockpuppets being involved already. The only thing Love Systems is notable for is marketing a product on wikipedia, and now sockpuppets being involved in edits. There should not be an article based on WP:SOAP and WP:NOTDIARY. --Liddy64 (talk) 1:41, 02 Jun 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.