Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superior Model Management

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 of the debate was Delete The Land 17:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Superior Model Management[edit]

Like uh, at the most, it's 29 days old. Wikipedia is not a company launch announcement service.-- Perfecto 00:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Perfecto 00:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as advertisement --Bugturd 00:41, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 00:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
not delete This might be no relevant information for people in all country's but it is for people in Holland. Because of this is an international encyclopedia I think this article is allowed to stay. It is no ad, because there is no text such as "visit this site now" or something. Just the same as for example Elite Model Management. Regards P.S. Sorry for my bad english I hope you all understand my words. Comment pls? DC.
- Elite Model Management is verifiable with a BusinessWeek article. You can come back when you are verifiable and notable. --Perfecto 01:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This agency has a supermodel Lonneke Engel. I also wanted to make a listing for Premier Model Management who has Naomi Campbell but that is also not allowed? DC.
- Consider adding the information to Lonneke Engel and Naomi Campbell. Also consider signing your comments with four tildes, so it looks like this -> Ikkyu2 04:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I removed the unverified claims of representation made in the article. Voters may wish to view the old version if they haven't already. If the claims are correct, please cite a reliable source. At the moment, there is no source, not even the company itself (which wouldn't be sufficient, but would help). --Rob 01:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So when there is a source you will accept. Well in that case i understand but still one advice. Remove the words "the company claims" I think you are not the company so you are not alllowed to speak for them in negative way. ;) And the other question, would you accept premier model management as agency for Naomi? DC.
- If there is verifiable information about the organization, then it will be considered, but by no means assured of acceptance. Personally, I would accept an article with a modest number of models with qualified articles. However, other editors are much stricter, so I don't want to suggest if you spent a lot of time finding sources, you'll be assured of acceptance, as you won't be. Finding verifiable information is merely the starting point of consideration. Generally, when an article is seen as advertising, editors are much stricter in terms of demanding clear proof of notability. But, I can't really speak for other editors. Also, I reworded the article, as best I could, so as to avoid anybody being mislead into thinking Wikipedia is vouching for any claims. We can't state as fact what this organizataion does, because we don't know. We have no knowledge that this company actually represents any models. But, we do know it claims to. All I did is state the facts, as best as is known.--Rob 02:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn, unlikely, unverified. Not the place for free advertising or an egotrip DC, you aint the first and wont be the last. Deiz 02:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per the others. Golfcam 04:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per everyone. StarryEyes 11:35, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - advertising. Latinus 23:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-noteable —akghetto ^talk 18:58, 4 February 2006 (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.