Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MacKay-Lyons Sweetapple Architects

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. Piotrus, feel free to redirect if so desired. Daniel (talk) 12:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MacKay-Lyons Sweetapple Architects[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Most sources either insignificant or affiliated with the architectural firm in some way. The exception is the source "The Work of MacKay-Lyons Sweetapple Architects - Economy as Ethic. ", seemingly impressive but in actuality is a very long coffee table book comprised mostly of promotional photographs of this architectural firms' work. Primary source. The awards, while impressive sounding, are generally minor industry awards whose institutions that award them are barely notable. The most important award would be the RAIC gold medal awarded to Brian Mackay Lyons and not to his firm as a whole. Would be better suited for his article. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nova Scotia-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 22:46, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 22:46, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete/redirect. Press releases and worse. Canadian Architect reads like a low-reliability trade journal that obviously republished press releases - this is not 'reliable journalism'. The only thing going for them is the book Work of Mackay Lyons Sweetapple Architects: Economy as Ethic. The author seems reliable and I see no COI ([1]), and the publisher is reliable too (Thames & Hudson). It may be an album, but I see no reason to discount it or qualify it as a primary (not independent) source; at the same time, I can't provide any evidence the book contains in-depth discussion - it may be just an album with next to no text, hard to say. The book certainly hadn't made any waves, I can't find a single review. Ping me if more is found, or there is proof the book includes some analysis. IF it could be shown that the book does contain some analysis, I might be changing my vote to weak keep. PS. Ironically, if they decided to make the book open access, instead of treating it as the usual for-profit work (i.e. if we could see what's inside), it could help save this. But it seems they as usual prefer such old school methods of promotion, and thus can't get a Wikipedia entry... their choice. PPS. While unreliable as a source, the book has a good (lengthy) but negative review by an expert in Amazon comments: [2]. The review also notes that there are older books about works of Brian MacKay-Lyons (and here it is worth noting that the company is not notable, but their lead architect is - and hence, a redirect might be a valid outcome here). His biography already mentions his (less notable?) partner Talbot Sweetapple, whose name is the other half of the company's. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:42, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.