Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Le mariage

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Le mariage

Le mariage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Unnotable company, page created by COI editor – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 04:32, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

- talk 04:51, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

- talk 04:51, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete as it is a non-notable company. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 12:30, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete
  WP:CSD G11. Any article that uses the word "leading" in the first sentence and written by a COI editor is going to be irretrievable spam regardless of any notability it doesn't have. SpinningSpark 14:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete Luxury wedding planners are by design, unable to have full-market appeal and in the end, nobody thinks of who created an absurdly-large wedding that you know was coordinated by many more people and companies.
  chatter) 03:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria for notability, fails GNG and
  HighKing⁺⁺ 17:51, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete. Neither a COI, or using "leading" in the first sentence, are valid reasons for deletion, but having searched for sources, I didn't find enough to justify an article. I found these that don't appear in the article: 15min (Lithuanian source - brief mention), Al Sharq Times - more substantial, but not a source I'm sure about. I think that unless more coverage can be identified, then (despite clearly working on some huge wedding occasions) the subject isn't shown to satisfy
  WP:CORP. --Michig (talk) 08:18, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]