Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manchester Cathedral Gardens Subculture 2

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 and salt --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Note: the talk page has been kept for reasons stated on that page. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 15:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manchester Cathedral Gardens Subculture

Manchester Cathedral Gardens Subculture (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This is the second nomination for this article to be deleted (the last, found here, did not reach a consensus). I believe this article to be non-notable, original research, with no reliable source material attributed to it. Full of MOS breaches. Nomination follows discussion at WT:GM. -- Jza84 · (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - There is first a sever problem with the prose, lines like

  "There is also an irony in the dispersal - It is part of the city's culture which Urbis celebrates in their idea of an Urban city".

  presents the page as some sort of "attack" on the organisers of the area. A "us" and "them" perception is created, sections like "Moshers vs. Chavs" and "Street wardens" are evident of that. There is no other assertion of notability, citations of reliable sources, or even any other sources, are minimal, and the verifiability of the whole piece is not ensured the through the correct amount of referencing. It also has very serious problems with original research, as stated in the nomination statement. Rt. 22:30, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete lacks media coverage Addhoc (talk) 23:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - For all the reasons given by posters, above.  DDStretch  (talk) 15:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment The article is was created by the CEO of Urbis to distance the "art gallery" from the youths outside. It has some regional newspaper articles about it. I have tried and tried to find more sources but it has been like trying to find gold in the Mersey. Manchester City Council employs an outreach team to liase with the youth, but the outreach site is like a myspace blog and not what I would consider reliable. Headers and article titles can be changed. Personally I cant continue to defend the article without other editors wondering "why?" - if you look at the talk page here and at Talk:Urbis it has been an unrewarding battle from saving it from even more crap. I give up. Maybe a newly retitled article with new prose is needed. If a deleted is made a would ask for a SALT so that a new article can't be created with the current mis-leading title. Mike33 - t@lk 08:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I would agree with the use of SALT if the article is deleted, for the reasons that Mike33 give.  DDStretch  (talk) 12:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Agree with salting also. Addhoc (talk) 13:01, 28 December 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.