Talk:MutualArt.com: Difference between revisions
→Is MutualArt.com reputable?: The idea that Mutualart is a scam is ridiculous. It is a serious company with broad human support and are recognized by the art community and many big players in the industry use our services. Tags: Manual revert Reverted |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
{{ping|Rosec92}} Please provide independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] indicating that this website is notable per [[WP:NWEB|notability guidelines]]. There are many large websites with many members; that is not enough for a Wikipedia page. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:25, 3 April 2015 (UTC) |
{{ping|Rosec92}} Please provide independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] indicating that this website is notable per [[WP:NWEB|notability guidelines]]. There are many large websites with many members; that is not enough for a Wikipedia page. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:25, 3 April 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Is MutualArt.com reputable? == |
|||
I have my doubts. Since 2010 I have been receiving emails from them but however often I 'unsubscribe' they keep sending them. Their physical address is simply a London mailing address. They have no phone number. Their 'support' email address sends out an automated response with no subsequent follow-up. |
|||
The website is registered anonymously through GoDaddy. |
|||
Everything about this website suggests that it is a scam, and I for one would welcome the deletion of this wiki page. |
|||
[[User:StephenJPC|StephenJPC]] ([[User talk:StephenJPC|talk]]) 08:02, 9 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== MutualArt and the Artist Pension Trust == |
== MutualArt and the Artist Pension Trust == |
||
Revision as of 12:16, 16 December 2020
Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because its a page about a arts directory that is still in progress 38.100.172.130 (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC).
Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is a large online information website with a worldwide base of members, which deals with a huge amount of information in the artworldRosec92 (talk) 19:17, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
@Rosec92: Please provide independent reliable sources indicating that this website is notable per notability guidelines. There are many large websites with many members; that is not enough for a Wikipedia page. 331dot (talk) 19:25, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
MutualArt and the Artist Pension Trust
The APT was established in 2004 and is ultimately owned by MutualArt https://www.theguardian.com/money/2009/sep/19/artists-pensions By 2018, things were not looking so rosy https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/mar/17/art-pension-trust-investment-legal-action-artists Note that, like my earlier reported experience, the Guardian has found MutualArt suspiciously opaque. I find it impossible to believe that this is anything other than a scam StephenJPC (talk) 21:40, 30 July 2019 (UTC)