Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pinehouse Photography Club


 * 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. Speedily deleted as a WP:G12 violation per 's tag. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:45, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Pinehouse Photography Club

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a local club, created by the person who runs is. Sources are some local coverage. No evidence of meeting WP:GNG Melcous (talk) 22:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG; the subject appears to be on only local interest. The author clearly has a conflict of interest. Luke  Talk  23:24, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Appears to be notable. Unsure on local interest guidelines, though. So, for now, I'll say . Doug Mehus (talk) 02:40, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I've changed my vote. The article is well cited. Formatting of citations could be improved to include name of publisher instead of just domain name, but that's minor. Some images may not be needed and I would encourage User:Dreerwin to look at WP:ER whereby she would propose in the page's Talk page what she would like to edit and have another editor peer review it, if she is works for, is on the board of, or a close friend or family member of anyone involved with this club. As to local restrictions on articles, I'm not aware of any. It appears locally notable to me. Doug Mehus (talk) 05:16, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep, meets WP:GNG, the WP:THREE are: CBCNews, Globalnews.ca, and Sask Polytec. Granted that third one is an alumni magazine, not the best RS. Here's a shorter piece from a radio station. There is also additional follow-up coverage from CBC and Globalnews . A GNG hardliner might not agree there are three in there, but the first two, without a doubt, are WP:SIGCOV, and so I think it meets the "multiple" requirement of GNG. – Levivich  16:59, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:07, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:07, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:07, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep, meets WP:GNG heard of this on National news. Relevant add. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.165.223.143 (talk) 14:47, 13 October 2019 (UTC)  — 142.165.223.143 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep Appears to be notable and credible with no conflict of interest. ~Verna Mogk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.78.110.58 (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2019 (UTC)  — 24.78.110.58 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep passes GNG. Lightburst (talk) 01:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Per comments, article possess notability. Barca (talk) 22:25, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Personally not wholly convinced this will have any lasting notability. But seem to have enough now to pass.Slatersteven (talk) 14:29, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I trimmed 8KB of WP:coatrack items. Notable based on existing article sourcing. Lots of media coverage.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Something very strange is going on here. For one, I noticed that the writing in this article was perfect. Earwig's copyvio detector led me to delete abotu 50% of the already trimmed article for copyvio. One source led me to the web site for the club, which consists of the Wikipedia page code and sources floating over a background image. In a four-day old article, that shows coordination between the club and the article author beyond what has been admitted. I am assuming now that the entire article is copyvio or COI product and/or paid/promotional editing (as the editing is quite good, but the article author does not match that quality level in the creator's own posts). It's all highly dubious. Pinging . ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:58, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * And lo and behold, two accounts above appear to be sockpuppets. Note the closing name.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:25, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for cleaning this up. Any copyvio sections should be removed, and if the whole article is copyvio then I think it must be deleted. (I haven’t checked myself.) If it’s not all copyvio, I’m ambivalent about deleting just because of COI/sock issues alone, but I see the argument for it (and against). If it’s deleted, recreation (of a policy-compliant version of the article) should be allowed, as I think the subject of the article is GNG notable, regardless of the problems with this version of the article. (BTW I didn’t get your ping, not sure if it went through). – Levivich 04:54, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Still going for weak keep, but I note that [] could be read (its not that well written, even by my standards) as an admission of COI. But there does still seem to be some reporting of the club.Slatersteven (talk) 12:45, 17 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Week Keep The article needs a rewrite to remove some the promotional content, and most of the reliable sources are really just feel-good or fluff pieces, but there are enough of them to make me think it could be a topic that someone might want to search. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I noticed a disconnect between 's writing and the article prose. End result: the users that were posting here as Dreerwin and Halkett99 are socks. I'm going to just delete his/her/their contributions as they are both blocked and both !voted. If someone really wants to preserve that, then it is no problem to revert me. As the creator was a sock, had COI and the content looks to be all copyvio, I think delete is the only reasonable option here, unless someone wants to rewrite it from scratch. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:10, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I have nominated the page for G12 speedy deletion; the material was copied from https://www.pinehousepc.com/pinehouse-photography-club. The overlap is visible using Earwig's tool when comparing with the Google text-only cached version. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:27, 17 October 2019 (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.