Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Gibson Weddings


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:29, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Sam Gibson Weddings

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Comprehensively fails WP:CORP. The two "awards" from Wedding Ideas magazine are neither awards (only a "finalist") nor remotely notable. The remaining references are either connected to the subject, wedding blogs, IMDB, or spurious, e.g. which has no mention whatsoever of the subject. I can find nothing better. Note also that Sam Gibson Weddings is a member of the 20Collective, an article by the Orangemoody paid editing sockfarm and deleted multiple times. See also the related Articles for deletion/York Place Studios and Articles for deletion/Neil Palmer Photography. Although the creators of these three articles are all allegedly different editors, they all have the same modus operandi, i.e. create the page first as a redirect and then return a week later to turn it into an article, ,. Voceditenore (talk) 10:22, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Voceditenore (talk) 10:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Voceditenore (talk) 10:41, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Voceditenore (talk) 10:46, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per voceditenore.4meter4 (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, for the reasons given above. -- Hoary (talk) 04:03, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of in-depth coverage in multipleindependent reliable sources. Fails WP:CORP. The lack of sources is such that the creator was reduced to citing a wedding blog and directory service for content, among other unreliable sources.  I applaud Voceditenore for his work. --Bejnar (talk) 06:32, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Some coverage here and there, yes, but simply not enough for a better notable article. SwisterTwister   talk  22:10, 15 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.