Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motivational magic

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. Happyme22 (talk) 18:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Motivational magic[edit]

Guerrilla spam for a load of motivational magicians. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Spam. Movingboxes (talk) 06:58, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Spam. No indication that this subject has any notability. --Crusio (talk) 14:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as WP:SPAM The creator is using Wikipedia to promote his product. At $1,500 to $12,000 a presentation, I wouldn't bite. Artene50 (talk) 09:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Artene50, please re-read this article. There is no mention of company, nor self promotion, nor services. There are several specific specialties in the world of magic, such as street magic, closeup magic, stage magic. Motivational magic is a relatively new specialty, which rose in popularity in the 1990s. In writing this article, we followed the outline of the article on “Motivational Speakers”, which listed descriptions, certifications, fees and noted specialists in the field. Additionally, please consider that this article is within the scope of “WikiProject Magic”, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to magic on Wikipedia, and an online Wiki directory of noted magicians and their specialties. Yes, my screen name is concern for COI, and perhaps it should have been submitted by someone else for that concern -- but this article has indeed been written from a neutral observer POV. Also note that there are more specialists in this area of magic, than in other areas of magic. (“stage illusionists”, for example probably have less than 100 full-time paid professionals in the United States.) I can contribute great volumes of information to Wiki on the world of magic, its inner workings, and its community of high achievers; but, I feel like many of the editors viciously pounce on new writers with unbridled venom, and a good portion of it is groundless. It is very discouraging to new writers who want to contribute. Easy to see why so many give up and move on to other things. MotivationalMagic (talk) 15:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- So why not try contributing to other articles first? There is no glory in creating an article. If it is really notable, someone else will create it witough the suspicion of spamming and conflict of interest.
Meanwhile, Delete seems a non-notable profession at the moment, and not a type of magic, just a new venue for magicians. Needs more independant sources to prove notability (ie from national newspapers discussing it, not magicians selling it, or local papers filling in on a slow news day).Yobmod (talk) 12:11, 25 July 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.