Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand prix d'horologie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result was Nomination Withdrawn. Non-admin closure. DARTH PANDAduel 01:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Grand prix d'horologie[edit]
- Grand prix d'horologie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This is the type of subject for which I would expect plenty of information to be available on the web if it was notable, but Google finds next to nothing: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. The article creator seems to be using Wikipedia as a WP:SOAPBOX. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I am aware of print sources for this - there's a discussion of Swiss mechanical watches and their competitions in a book I've read called A Revolution in Time - but this definitely seems to be a soapbox, and borderline attack page, albeit not directed against a named individual. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep/Delete It seemed obvious that a major promotion would be found in Google and so the title must have been misspelt. And so it proved. I have moved the article to the correct title and cleaned up the POV prose. The old title/redirect should be deleted as an error. Colonel Warden (talk) 22:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I wasn't sure about this one when I saw it proposed for deletion, but I accept Col. Warden's argument. Its a major industry award. sure, its influenced by commercial considerations. A great deal of he world is, but we dotn exclude things fro mwp on that basis. we are more than an encyclopedia of the non-profits.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nomination withdrawn per Col. Warden's discovery. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:07, 8 November 2008 (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.