Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Casino (collective)

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 & salt — Caknuck 04:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Big Casino (collective)

Big Casino (collective) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Although the lead paragraph makes this sound like an impressive organisation, on closer inspection none of these projects actually seem to exist. The magazine has yet to publish a single issue, while I'm unable to locate a single release of any kind on the record label; assuming those fall down, all that's left is a COI piece (written by User:Timbouckley about his own organisation) about a student art club, plus an unsourced statement that the group "plays an important and active role in London's arts and cultural scene". While the un-Googlable name means there could be sources out there I'm missing, there's certainly not anything I can find to suggest that this group has had any coverage in reliable sources whatsoever - the sole "reference" is merely to a collection of photos of an exhibition in Area 10 Project Space (itself long deleted as a non-notable venue) and — while I'm well aware this is unscientific — I would expect to be aware of any organisation of any note operating in this field in London, and I have never heard of this group. Bringing it to AfD instead of prodding, in order to give more people who might be able to find reasons to save it a chance to rescue it — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:49, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Looking at the creator's talk page the creator's talk page prior to their blanking of the previous deletion notifications for this article it appears this article may have already been deleted twice - any sysops could take a look at the history & see if this qualifies as a G4? — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
• Further comment Since nominating this, an anon has deleted the mention of Tim Bouckley from the article — iridescent (talk to me!) 17:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete and Salt, originally deleted as an A7 and now it's back. Somehow I doubt that a school art club formed in 2007 and which doesn't seem to have released anything really "plays an active role" in the arts scene of London. No references either: the linked page doesn't even mention them. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy delete and salt, blatant vanispamifragilisticexpialidocious. Page already deleted twice as an A7. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete and apply liberal amounts of sodium chloride. Burntsauce 23:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Does not meet WP:N. Also, WP:NOT#CRYSTALBALL However, A7 does not seem to apply. The article asserted importance/significance. This AfD may determine whether such assertion is reasonable for future speedy deletes. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 03:29, 18 September 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.