Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 December 19: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
link previous deletion discussion |
|||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
* Not sure it's that promotional, but it does seem to have a fair number of references to puff pieces/pr. At least one "news" story states "This content comes from KT Engage, the brand marketing unit of Khaleej Times". I can't imagine it would survive an xFD in the current state, would probably be best to get this into draft and work on it to remove such before returning to mainspace. --[[Special:Contributions/81.100.164.154|81.100.164.154]] ([[User talk:81.100.164.154|talk]]) 12:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC) |
* Not sure it's that promotional, but it does seem to have a fair number of references to puff pieces/pr. At least one "news" story states "This content comes from KT Engage, the brand marketing unit of Khaleej Times". I can't imagine it would survive an xFD in the current state, would probably be best to get this into draft and work on it to remove such before returning to mainspace. --[[Special:Contributions/81.100.164.154|81.100.164.154]] ([[User talk:81.100.164.154|talk]]) 12:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC) |
||
* This is a mess, and partially my fault. The article was [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Century_Financial previously deleted at AFD] last month as "Century Financial". Article was a hodgepodge of promotional claims and paid/PR sources and trivial "recognition". The article was recreated by {{u|Francisjk2020}} at [[Century Financial Consultancy]] and quickly moved to draft by {{u|BoraVoro}} (see [[Draft:Century Financial Consultancy]]). I removed some of the more obvious, and at least marked, paid advertorials. The article was then rereated again in mainspace by the same editor. After removing the same promotional material, I noted the prior AFD and and many other PR sources and intended to delete with A11/A5. I mistakenly left off the A5 from the delete comment (substaintially the same, only with less supporting material). The draft is still there to work on, with a comment from me related to the failed validation on the sources. ''[[User:Kuru|Sam '''Kuru''']] [[User_talk:Kuru|(talk)]]'' 12:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC) |
* This is a mess, and partially my fault. The article was [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Century_Financial previously deleted at AFD] last month as "Century Financial". Article was a hodgepodge of promotional claims and paid/PR sources and trivial "recognition". The article was recreated by {{u|Francisjk2020}} at [[Century Financial Consultancy]] and quickly moved to draft by {{u|BoraVoro}} (see [[Draft:Century Financial Consultancy]]). I removed some of the more obvious, and at least marked, paid advertorials. The article was then rereated again in mainspace by the same editor. After removing the same promotional material, I noted the prior AFD and and many other PR sources and intended to delete with A11/A5. I mistakenly left off the A5 from the delete comment (substaintially the same, only with less supporting material). The draft is still there to work on, with a comment from me related to the failed validation on the sources. ''[[User:Kuru|Sam '''Kuru''']] [[User_talk:Kuru|(talk)]]'' 12:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC) |
||
*:I assume you mean G4 rather than A5? --[[Special:Contributions/81.100.164.154|81.100.164.154]] ([[User talk:81.100.164.154|talk]]) 22:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
====[[:Biewer Terrier]]==== |
====[[:Biewer Terrier]]==== |
||
Revision as of 22:40, 19 December 2023
The company was voted as the best place to work in the UAE and best workplace in the UAE for women. Plenty of credible sources for century financial. it was speedily deleted though the content was new. Francisjk2020 (talk) 03:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC) -->
- @Francisjk2020: please advise the administrator who most recently deleted the article, Kuru, as outlined in Step 2 of Wikipedia:Deletion review#Steps to list a new deletion review. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Note: temporarily undeleted for DRV. Daniel (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- It was deleted as advertising, so it does not matter if it is new or not. We just have to confirm whether it is too promotional to keep. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- I would say it is not to promotional to be here, even if the purpose of the page is promotional. There is a claim of importance, but I would vote delete in an AFD for failing WP:NCORP. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- It was deleted as advertising, so it does not matter if it is new or not. We just have to confirm whether it is too promotional to keep. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure it's that promotional, but it does seem to have a fair number of references to puff pieces/pr. At least one "news" story states "This content comes from KT Engage, the brand marketing unit of Khaleej Times". I can't imagine it would survive an xFD in the current state, would probably be best to get this into draft and work on it to remove such before returning to mainspace. --81.100.164.154 (talk) 12:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- This is a mess, and partially my fault. The article was previously deleted at AFD last month as "Century Financial". Article was a hodgepodge of promotional claims and paid/PR sources and trivial "recognition". The article was recreated by Francisjk2020 at Century Financial Consultancy and quickly moved to draft by BoraVoro (see Draft:Century Financial Consultancy). I removed some of the more obvious, and at least marked, paid advertorials. The article was then rereated again in mainspace by the same editor. After removing the same promotional material, I noted the prior AFD and and many other PR sources and intended to delete with A11/A5. I mistakenly left off the A5 from the delete comment (substaintially the same, only with less supporting material). The draft is still there to work on, with a comment from me related to the failed validation on the sources. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- I assume you mean G4 rather than A5? --81.100.164.154 (talk) 22:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
The deletion discussion took place in 2009. Since then, this dog has become increasingly notable, including having a standard,[1] gaining full AKC recognition in 2021,[2] and garnering mention in several books and scholarly articles[3][4][5][6][7][8] While I definitely don't think we should restore the original Biewer Terrier article that was deleted in 2009 as it was not of suitable quality, if the article was to be recreated, I propose we restore [this version]. With some cleanup and the addition of the sources I mentioned, I think notability would be demonstrated.
The biggest issue that I forsee is that some publications consider them a subtype of the Yorkshire terrier, a similar issue to the Phalène, which the FCI recognizes as a separate breed from the Papillon dog but the AKC does not. Annwfwn (talk) 03:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- References
- ^ STANDARD OF THE BIEWER TERRIER (PDF)
- ^ McReynolds, Tony (2021-01-04), American Kennel Club decrees the Biewer terrier an official breed
- ^ Hoppendale, George (2018). Biewer Terrier. Biewer Terrier Complete Owners Manual. Biewer Terrier book for care, costs, feeding, grooming, health and training.
- ^ Jones, Athena (2021). The Complete Guide for Biewer Terrier: The essential guide to being a perfect owner and having an obedient, healthy, and happy Biewer Terrier.
- ^ Kraemer, Eva-marie (2017). Der Kosmos-Hundeführer: Hunderassen kennenlernen [The Kosmos dog guide: Get to know dog breeds] (PDF).
- ^ Radko, Anna (2021), "Microsatellite DNA Analysis of Genetic Diversity and Parentage Testing in the Popular Dog Breeds in Poland", Genes, vol. 12, no. 4
- ^ "Meet the Biewer", DogWatch
- ^ Bixler, Alice (2011), "Simply Irresistible", DogWorld, vol. 96, no. 3
- @Annwfwn: please advise the editor who closed the AfD discussion, as outlined in Step 2 of Wikipedia:Deletion review#Steps to list a new deletion review. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- Allow recreation. The linked version is sufficiently different from the version that was redirected in 2009, such that any attempts to delete or re-redirect should take place at a new AFD. Also, at the close of this discussion (and no earlier), Biewer Terrier (dog) should be speedy deleted (probably under G6 or G14). Frank Anchor 14:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)