Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spanish Black Belt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Spanish Black Belt
Proded 24 February with this message Article highly promotional of a local languge school with little or no claim for notability or for significance beyond its immediate location. Article maintained almost entirely by one contributor who has not edited any other article, and therefore appears to be using Wikipedia solely for the purpose of promotion of this business. which was deleted without explanation by a previously unregistered user, who has also made no other contribution to Wikipedia. Kevin McE 20:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Entirely self referencing advertisement. --Daniel J. Leivick 20:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Advert. -- Necrothesp 01:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Jahangard 05:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Article is verificable (has third party references). Article may still have some advertisement format probably because of not knowing internal norms. Article has evolved over time to be more neutral. More users are adding information.--Ncanales 01:16, 3 March 2007
- Delete. The article is promotional, original research and not neutral point of view. In addition, it was written largely by Ncanales (who is also Nicholas Canales the founder of Spanish Black Belt). Wikipedia policy does not allow the production of vanity sites. Please note that this expresses no hostility towards the school: it sounds quite interesting and Mr. Canales seems an eager, honest person. However, Wikipedia is NOT a business directory. I wish him and his business the best, but they need to find a business site, not an encyclopedia. A final point: a prod for deletion was added and Ncanales removed this prod, which is also a clear violation of Wiki policy. Interlingua talk email 06:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. No, it's clearly not a violation of policy. Anyone, including the creator, can remove a prod, as is clearly stated in WP:PROD. He should have explained why he'd removed it, but his removal of it was perfectly acceptable. -- Necrothesp 14:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. Interlingua talk email 15:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. I apologize for deleting the PROD. I indeed understood that doing so would not go against any wikipedia policy, but had I know that would have created controversy, I would not have deleted it. I apologize again. I did not create the page. Page was indeed created in a advert format. I did edit major sections to correct this violation hoping that other people would participate later. Other people are starting to edit the page. I just ask for a delay in your decision and/or for advice on how to add tags to advice others what type of changes/editions are valid and which ones are not. -- Ncanales 11:34, 3 March 2007
- Comment If user names are any guide, the article was created by Santiago Anria, a tutor and development co-ordinator for this business. The vast majority of contributions to the article have been made by him, ncanales and an unregistered user at 208.59.127.200: between them, there was only one very minor edit made outside of this article. Although the efforts that ncanales has made deserve to be acknowledged as being in good faith, I do not believe that the business is notable or significant beyond its immediate area of operation. The information now offered in the article, well sourced and relatively NPOV as it is, is now more a description of a style of teaching, and not encyclopedic information about the subject of the article. I'm afraid it is the nature and scale of the business that render it inappropriate for an entry in Wikipedia, and not only the original tone of the article that Nicholas has worked hard to redress. Kevin McE 19:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. No, it's clearly not a violation of policy. Anyone, including the creator, can remove a prod, as is clearly stated in WP:PROD. He should have explained why he'd removed it, but his removal of it was perfectly acceptable. -- Necrothesp 14:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Non-notable. The references need to be about the school. - Aagtbdfoua 00:51, 8 March 2007 (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.
