Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taylor & Burns Architects


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:36, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Taylor & Burns Architects

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Doesn't meet the notability criteria for companies. None of the sources listed, nor any I was able to find through searching, provided significant coverage of the company itself. In addition, the most frequent contributors are COI editors, both past/present employees and one of its owners. The article reads more like a promotional pamphlet of the company's projects and accolades. If kept, this should stripped back to a stub. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:42, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:42, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - 100% true about the sourcing. I cannot locate anything that meets WP:ORGCRIT. Interesting enough one of the associates may meet guidelines for her own page. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:53, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Massachusetts.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:53, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Ugh. Beyond the above, the article creator was a SPA who spent a great deal of effort promoting this article, and the firm's ostensible creators, in other articles: .  He also created numerous redirects that will need untangling.   Ravenswing      22:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The article creator was likely the firm's intern named by the company's principal (, self-identified as Carol Burns), in . My guess is that they were editing at the direction of their superiors, or on their own in an earnest attempt to please them. Since their activity predates the WP:PAID policy, they can't be faulted for that... but WP:COI and WP:PROMO violations abound. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2022 (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.