Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 November 6

< November 5	Deletion review archives: 2008 November	November 7 >

6 November 2008

Pligg.

I don't know if im doing this correctly.. But I want to write a review on the Pligg CMS (http://www.pligg.com/). Found out about it http://webdevnews.net/tag/pligg/ then set it up http://www.howtoforge.com/news_voting_with_pligg Thanks this would be my first article. I found it to be locked, went to the IRC channel they redirected me to this site.

Europa Corp.

This company is notable film production and distribution company for France and Japanese market. Pierre411 (talk) 05:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note this appears to be Luc Bessons distributiom company in france and has interwiki links to articles in French and Chinese. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuropaCorp & http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%AD%90%E7%BE%85%E5%B7%B4%E5%BD%B1%E6%A5%AD. None of the articles has sources so far. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As deleting admin, I am so very much surprised that this the creator of the article made this request without asking me first why it was deleted. Others will know what to say so I will now hold my peace. Pegasus «C¦T» 09:57, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse speedy-deletion as a valid application of criterion A7. The sole usable content of the page was "Europa corp is a french distibutor of films directed by Luc Besson." (The list of their film offerings was clearly inappropriate advertising-like content. The link to the IMDB page and to the company's webpage demonstrate merely that an organization by this name exists. No evidence was available through either link about the company itself. I find no assertion of any significance.
Note: the fact that the prior version was speedy-deleted should not be taken as a prohibition on writing a new, sourced article. Be bold. When doing so though, please be sure that the company meets Wikipedia's generally accepted inclusion criterion for organizations. Rossami (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Savoy

He is a prominent member of the seduction community with reliable outside sources to verify. His page conforms the standards of Wikipedia, better than the other seduction gurus' pages. The deletion of this page was done for invalid reasons other than just looking at its history of the page. The current is new and updated to meet the WP standards. After approval of two administrators, the page went live. Can anyone revive this page? Camera123456 (talk) 07:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The AfD for this article is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Savoy, Nick Zsinj^Talk 10:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse closure (keep deleted) pending the presentation of independent, reliably sourced evidence. This was a complicated close and it would have been helpful if the closer had put more of his/her analysis in the closing comments. As is, we are left to reinterpret the closure rationale ourselves.
In my own analysis of the closure, I discounted several of the comments as either deliberately duplicative or suspiciously new users. The comments of established users all focused on the lack of sources demonstrating that the subject meets Wikipedia's generally accepted inclusion criteria for biographies. None of those arguing to keep the page provided answers to those concerns. (Some examples of passing references and human interest news stories in which he was used as an example or source were offered but, from the comments of the participants, those were not considered sufficient. For the purposes of establishing notability, sources need to be primarily about the subject, not merely examples used in an article about a larger topic.) No new evidence has been offered here. I find no process problems with the closure of this discussion. Rossami (talk) 18:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]