Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Speedlite Scene

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. Michig (talk) 14:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

London Speedlite Scene

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

A private social networking service, obviously important to its members, but lacking any significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of this article. Shirt58 (talk) 13:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

s*s*s"Keep" I am the article's creator. Reliable sources have been cited from individuals who are independent professionals in the field (photography). p4pictures is the website of photographer and photo specialist trainer of Oxfordshire based Brian Worley. In 1995 Brian joined Canon Europe where he was one of a small team preparing Canon’s European operation for the launch of digital cameras and other imaging products in to the European market place. During his time at Canon he has been European Product Manager for photo products, and most recently Communications Manager looking after the creation of the revised CPS program and the CPN website. Natetogg (talk) 17:53, 21 October 2012 (UTC)— Natetogg (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Shirt58 (talk) 13:51, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A private social network that fails WP:GNG does not need a Wiki page, and the comment defending it above seems to make next-to-no-sense whatsoever. Lukeno94 (talk) 21:00, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — Zero coverage in reliable sources. The article creator cites only personal websites like Simonvardy.com, p4pictures.com, and Swsphoto.co.uk. These fail WP:SPS. The link [1] is nothing more than a shout out. WP:ORGDEPTH explains we need to see non-trivial coverage in secondary sources. WP:CLUB says we need to see both "1. The scope of their activities is national or international in scale. and 2. Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by multiple, third-party, independent, reliable sources." We have not even one independent reliable source. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:14, 27 October 2012 (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.