Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Advertising
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Advertising. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Advertising|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Advertising. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

watch |
Advertising
- Maciej Łagodziński (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Just casual actor and dubber, perfoming mostly in secoundary/episodical roles or dubbing animation characters to fairytales. I don't see any notability guidelines accordinglly to him The Wolak (talk) 08:36, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. The Wolak (talk) 08:36, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Advertising. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Niche roles, and niche reception, the best source is a single small, very borderline SIGCOV piece in a niche portal (OnetKobieta). Too little for WP:NBIO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- Angus Maclaine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NBASIC. Only claim to notability seems to be as (presumptive?) holder of a hereditary title. Holders of such titles are not automatically notable. Only other claim to notability seems to be as founder/exec of a 100-person advertising company. There are no sources to support the bulk of the article text (raising significant WP:BLP issues) or establish notability. The only source in the article is a single trivial passing mention. The only sources in the original revision were this passing mention, and the subject's own LinkedIn page and company website. I cannot find any independent/indepth coverage. (Note that title was previously BLPPROD declined by original author (after adding LinkedIn/company website sources). And A7 declined based on existence of two similar articles(?).) Guliolopez (talk) 09:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Advertising, and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Alinur Velidedeoğlu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It was deleted a year ago, and not much has changed since then. There’s been the same routine coverage of events, interviews, and mentions. Since he’s an advertising executive, some routine media coverage is to be expected, but direct, in‑depth, quality coverage is still lacking. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 09:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Turkey, and Michigan. Shellwood (talk) 10:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, Politics, and Advertising. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep: Notability is easily satisfied through both the GNG and the SNG about creative artists. The sources are not routine coverage. His advertising work is covered in depth in two academic papers. He was in charge of Turkey's second largest and oldest political party's advertising campaign. The nominator did an AfC review for this article but did not mention at all any concern about "notability" in their review comments, all their concern was about the non-encyclopedic style and NPOV violations. What is the reason for this inconsistency? If there is a notability concern, they should have mentioned in their AfC review. The subject is also the producer of various notable productions, which received coverage in sources like The Hollywood Reporter, which is considered a reliable source. The second deletion discussion was poorly attended, with non-policy-based !votes. RE: "not much has changed since then", please compare the two versions. Also, please see @Fram's comment in the first deletion discussion. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment This article was declined by Article for Creation on May 3 for being too promotional in tone. Article was then moved to main space by the creator with the comment The article waited too long in the AfC queue, and I disagree with the feedback it received. Feel free to nominate it for deletion if there are any concerns
. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:27, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note, but not exactly... I'm not the article's creator. It was created in 2007, and I wasn't active on Wikipedia at the time, and I have no connection to the user who created it. The AfC reviewer and the nominator of this AfD are the same user, and for some reason, they believe not much has changed between this version of the article and this earlier version. Also, they didn't say it was promotional; they said the style violates the Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy. I wasn't sure whether that meant it was too promotional or too defamatory, as there are paragraphs that could be interpreted either way, and all based on reliable sources. Note that the sources that I used are not tabloids, but mainstream Turkish newspapers, columnists, commentators and academic papers. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- The two versions that need to be compared are the one declined at AFC 12:03, 3 May 2025 edit and the draft moved to main space 20:07, 3 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alinur_Velidedeo%C4%9Flu&diff=1288613775&oldid=1288553988 You are correct that the article was declined as
not written in a formal, neutral encyclopedic tone
. I misspoke in my previous post when I stated the article was declined as being too promotional in tone. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)- The nomination statement of this AfD incorrectly states that not much has changed since the prior nomination, that's the reason I asked those two versions to be compared. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- comment I declined the speedy deletion, because the current article is substantially different from the one deleted, which consisted of only two of the current paragraphs. The opinion of a AfC reviewer does not constitute a deletion discussion, there is no need to have any improvement after that. No opinion on the notability, but given that it is harder to assert notability for people outside the english language world (and english references) and the efforts of TheJoyfulTentmaker in improving it, I suggest, that it is draftified/userfied if not kept - Nabla (talk) 11:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- The two versions that need to be compared are the one declined at AFC 12:03, 3 May 2025 edit and the draft moved to main space 20:07, 3 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alinur_Velidedeo%C4%9Flu&diff=1288613775&oldid=1288553988 You are correct that the article was declined as
- Delete As I clarified in the 2nd nomination. I do not think that the sources is adequate for passing GNG.--Kadı Message 10:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- Agna Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't seem to meet NCORP and I couldn't find much on a WP:BEFORE, but someone more familiar with Albanian sources might have better luck. BuySomeApples (talk) 03:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Albania. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Advertising, and Environment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- Draftify: As a recent creation with no independent or reliable sources, it should not have hit mainspace in the first place. MarioGom (talk) 09:35, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:21, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- Agree with Draftify, redirect or simply delete. The sources posted for this article are mostly primary and two sources are unreliable. I am unable to find any acceptable sources when doing a WP:BEFORE search. The company has been in existence since 1991, so there might sources available in European languages other than English. And I am not sure what the target should be for a redirect. I'm in agreement with any appropriate target. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 22:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)