Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Furniture Today

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - deleted - SimonP 21:46, May 15, 2005 (UTC)

Furniture Today

advertising about a DVD that hardly anyobody knows about it. vanity, delete -- Chris 73 Talk 08:19, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Note: Same author also created Jeremy Broun, which also needs at least more NPOV -- Chris 73 Talk 08:31, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

The anon signed this article as Jeremy Broun. I've now listed that article on VfD as well. Delete both. RickK 09:48, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete -- possible self promo - Longhair | Talk 08:23, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - POV beyond repair - Andre Engels 09:40, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Ae there rules that say I cannot list myself as a designer on this website and also write an associated highly informative article using my name or am I expected to use another name ? Please explain this curious reaction ? JB

This is ridiculous - I have to promote my lecture in order to educate people about this subject. How is this breaking the rules ? I have already amended my article to conform to your rules. I make very little commercially from this. You apear to be extremely quick to attach and pre-judge. Your criticisms include errors and spelling mistakes. Who are these adminstrators ? Young computer experts ? JB

I simply wish to use this site to expand the knowledge base on the field of contemporary furniture. You include Norman Foster as a furniture designer. He is an Internationallly renowned architect and his entry promotes him ! What is wrong with that ? Why one set of rules for him and another for me ? Please explain ! JB

If you do not know who I am then read one adminstrator's comments at the "Votes for Deletion" at Jeremy Broun.

• Delete. POV essay. Original research. -R. fiend 14:23, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per Wikipedia:No original research. Samaritan 16:18, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete . Salvage informative parts into Furniture. Mikkalai 20:39, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This doesn't read at all like an encyclopedia article. It has a very odd, boosterish tone. The author is obviously very excited about the furniture he makes, but this is a vanity article. --Stan.
• Delete period hydnjo talk 23:28, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Of course I am passionate about my craft ! Is this a crime ! Are these the criticisms of educated people whose opinions count ? In view of these astounding comments I am withdrawing my article. Jeremy Broun 8 May 2005

• Is this an enclopaedia article, or a William Morris -esque tract ?  ??NPOV?? --Simon Cursitor 08:03, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

9 May. Despite my withdrawing my article due to these comments it still appears and therefore attracts further comments. The article is a copy of one I have recently published in the UK and is a development of one I published in 1989 for a magazine called "Woodworking International" called "The Golden Age of Contemporary Craftsmanship" !!. Jeremy Broun (Jeremy Broun 16:42, 9 May 2005 (UTC))

• Delete - vanity - Tεxτurε 17:14, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Vanity. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:08, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: assuming this is deleted, "Furniture Today" is also an American trade magazine. I've written a stub at this discussion page. I assume I can recreate this article? Samw 01:07, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.