Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neil Palmer Photography


 * 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 Speedy delete. Deleted as G11. (non-admin closure) Lakun.patra (talk) 06:26, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Neil Palmer Photography

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable article created by SPA, fails WP:ORGDEPTH -- samtar whisper 13:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Searches show zero independent coverage of this firm. The references are either connected to the subject or spurious, e.g.
 * "By 1983 the business had flourished and had outgrown its premises" is referenced to which is literally about beans and where the only mention of Neil Palmer is in the photo credits
 * "In 2010 with John retiring they changed the name from John Palmer Studio to Neil Palmer Photography." is referenced to which is about the waste management company Veolia and where the only mention of Neil Palmer is in one photo credit.
 * "Neil Palmer Photography is an established social photography studio in the South East of England." was referenced deliberately misleadingly as . The actual name of the Bizjournals.com article was "WNY health pros support “achievable” goal of AIDS Task Force" not "Neil Palmer Photography" and Palmer's name appears only in one of the photo credits.
 * "In 2014 he was appointed official documentary photographer to Royal Ascot." is referenced to which neglects to mention that Palmer himself is the author, and more importantly nowhere does the "article" mention that Palmer was appointed official documentary photographer to Royal Ascot.
 * This has all the earmarks of the paid-for article, springing fully formed complete with multiple perfectly formatted but deliberately misleading references, and a perfectly formatted infobox from the hands of a "new" editor who had previously made only the obligatory minor edits to get themselves autoconfirmed. They then got down to their "real work", creating this and another article for a non-notable company. Note also that Neil Palmer Photography is a member of the 20Collective, an article by the Orangemoody paid editing sockfarm and deleted multiple times. Voceditenore (talk) 13:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Voceditenore (talk) 10:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Voceditenore (talk) 10:45, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Just a run-of-the-mill photography studio, nothing to indicate notability (either in the article or found). Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 14:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Highly promotional, no clear evidence that there would be anything left to the article if the promotion were removed, and nothing is provided or found to suggest this is anything more than run of the mill.--Arxiloxos (talk) 18:56, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Many of the sources point to the official website which is not reliable for showing WP:GNG. I also could not find anything that would help show WP:CORPDEPTH to satisfy notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:31, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lacks reliable independent sources and flatly fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 01:13, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per above and close per WP:SNOW.4meter4 (talk) 16:59, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete I suppose there might be two or three notable wedding photographers in the world, but this business is not one of them. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 18:38, 9 December 2015 (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.