Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Smith Hinchman & Grylls

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep rewritten article. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 19:38, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Smith Hinchman & Grylls

Tagged as {{cleanup-importance}} for two weeks, there is so little information about this company in this article that it looks like an ad. Zzyzx11 | Talk 01:39, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Without cleanup Delete Vegaswikian 06:57, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Without cleanup Delete Master Thief Garrett 07:16, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. If notable someone will create it and better. Pavel Vozenilek 09:29, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Call off your dogs, I just cleaned it up now. This is a pretty major company, history in this Architecture Week article. Please, could people just do a little research instead of just listing stuff because they haven't got a clue about it? --Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:53, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • It is NOT about whether it is notable or not! Please understand that! At the time of listing it looked like an ad. The User therefore did the right thing, WP does not allow ads. Whether or not it was about a valuable company is entirely immaterial, an article on Microsoft would be put up for Vfd if it looked like an ad, *unless* the article was cleaned up in the duration of the Vfd. Since you have cleaned it up, it is now fine. If the article had been at its current state at the time the User came across it, it would not have been listed for Vfd at all. I hope you understand. Have a nice day. Master Thief Garrett 02:04, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If an article looks like an ad, edit it so it no longer looks like an ad. Is that so difficult? But on the subject of the article as originally listed, it said this:

Founded in Detroit, Michigan in 1853. Known as the first architectural firm in the U.S.

Continues practice under the name SmithGroup

Then there was a link to http://www.smithgroup.com/.

In other words a perfectly normal business stub giving the barest essential information on a corporation. This article was wrongly listed, and very nearly deleted because the deletion policy was not followed and nobody could be bothered to look beyond their nose. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:15, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.