Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sydney Art Galleries and Art Community

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. Shimeru (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Art Galleries and Art Community[edit]

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

Speedy continually contested by article creator. This and this are the versions I put the speedy tags on, and although it appears that the article has been expanded, if you read the article you'll discover that the rest of the information is actually taken word-for-word from various other Wikipedia articles that have nothing to do with the subject. Erpert (let's talk about it) 17:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The creator has also been indefinitely blocked for having a promotional username. Erpert (let's talk about it) 17:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article asserts no notability nor does it have any sources. And as the nominator said, the creator was indef blocked for haveing a promotional username. Big COI here.--White Shadows ^{you're breaking up} 17:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I found zero sources. Joe Chill (talk) 20:51, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: interesting and potentially very useful project. I wish it all the best. If any members of the project are reading this discussion, I commend them on their use of Facebook to further the project, but would caution them against using its Wikipedia article as a home-page. This is because the article does not have any coverage at all, not even a primary source.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable Facebook group Nick-D (talk) 08:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 08:35, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lacks any coverage in any sources. --Mkativerata (talk) 08:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:24, 4 May 2010 (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.