Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LOT, Bristol

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. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOT, Bristol[edit]

I don't see what is notable about this topic. Moosato Cowabata (talk) 19:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article doesn't make LOT's notability clear to me either. Saying that it "stretched the long-established template of the non-profit making artist-run space" is just a peacock statement – what was new about it? I'm not impressed by the References list either. The Guardian piece turns out to be a one-paragraph review of one exhibition, only mentioning LOT itself in the final line as the name of the venue. I haven't checked the other references, but even if they do contain information demonstrating LOT's notability, the article fails to communicate that. EALacey (talk) 21:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 16:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:N and WP:RS. I find it rather telling that of the 8 people listed as involved in it, we only have an article on one, and that's a microstub. The fact that it lasted for all of 2 years doesn't speak much for notability either. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Little or no information on the topic, hard to understand, I just don't think that this should be suited as a Wikipedia article. Redmarkviolinist ^{Drop me a line} 16:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. Absolutely no notability is actually claimed. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete notable exhibits don't mean its notable. Travellingcari (talk) 17:15, 22 February 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.