Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UPFRONT TV

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Mailer Diablo 15:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UPFRONT TV

Spamvertisement. Tone of article and content clearly advertisement. Dated prod removed without any improvement to the article Lurker your words/my deeds 12:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

  • UPFRONT DELETION PROTEST

    Dear Sir

    Celebrities Worldwide is in fact an industry recognised standard, held in as much regard as a reference point as organisations such as the Press Association and the Internet Movie database. Their clients include major news organisations such as the BBC and ITN. Their website is www.celebritiesworldwide.com - I am talking from experience, as i once worked/am working in the entertainment industry. Please let me know if you still feel they are not genuine - I feel they are an invaluable source to professional industry people, not third rate hacks, who they most certainly wouldn't do business with

    Thank you

    SC (User:Sixorgansofadmittance)

  • DELETION PROTEST

    Dear Sir

    Thank you for your concise, swift reply – much appreciated. First of all, let me say I fully appreciate your concerns, however, I believe you have misunderstood what Celebrities Worldwide and its sister company UPFRONT TV actually does. I've just discovered how useful these services are and it would be a real shame to deny Wikipedia visitors the chance to hear about them.

    Celebrities Worldwide offers official contact information for celebrities. It's an amazing resource for anyone in the media or entertainment industry to make contact within seconds with the most direct point of contact for over 20,000 celebrities worldwide.

    It's sister company UPFRONT TV is the celebrity booking service and the vast range of celebrities booked by UPFRONT is, I notice, detailed on www.celebritiesworldwide.com.

    Both companies have had a key role in creating some of the most high profile events which have been extensively covered by the media and consequently have had a significant impact on popular culture, trend and style over many years. This has been and continues to be a major source of entertainment and fascination to the general public as a whole.

    Finally, I notice you have listings for “Nike”, “MacDonald’s” and “Wal-Mart” on Wikipedia whose content does not seem to differ greatly from the information I have provided on the above 2 services.

    I trust you will reconsider.

    Kind regards

    SC (User:Sixorgansofadmittance)

  • Again: The way to persuade editors is not to argue that Wikipedia visitors should not be denied the opportunity to read an advertisement, which will if anything make editors only more firmly convinced that this article should be deleted, but to demonstrate that this company satisfies the criteria laid out in WP:CORP. Uncle G 13:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:SPAM Dark Shikari 13:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete with prejudice based on admitted violations of WP:SPAM. Also, if you guys could remind me never to do business with UPFRONT TV, that'd be great, thanks. WilyD 13:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete for being unencyclopedic spam. Diagonalfish 13:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - spam -- Whpq 13:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. You know, if you're going to pretend that you have nothing to do with UPFRONT TV and Celebrities Worldwide, maybe you shouldn't have created the articles yourself and uploaded the images yourself. You think? wikipediatrix 13:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as spam, and kindly ask author to make the slightest effort (so far absent) to undertand what Wikipedia is. Fan-1967 13:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:CORP and WP:SPAM. I appreciate the protestations against deletion. Perhaps the author(s) should read the guidelines on WP:CORP and WP:SPAM to appreciate why Nikes, McDonalds, and Wal-Mart do warrant articles. Those entities have corporate notability and their articles are not written as advertisements. Scorpiondollprincess 14:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, Wikipedia is not free advertising for your PR company. NawlinWiki 14:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


Ok, fair enough everyone - but what should i delete? I mean, over the years I've had excellent experiences with these guys, they're a very useful resource and they've been around for 60 years i beleive - information i beleive is int he poublic interest. Surely a brief synopsis of what the company is is ok? what about if i deleted those lists? Thanks for your help everyone! And by the way, I'm not a "self employed web developer" - I work for a british TV company as a cameraman! I did business with these guys sone years ago - apologies if it appears to be spam, there's no need to take it so personally!!

  • Comment Please see WP:CORP and WP:SPAM for relevant crtieria. If you can't find a way to explain why it satisfies them, the article will go Lurker your words/my deeds 14:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Working on kosher references nowSixorgansofadmittance 15:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)



I've cut the article down to the barest minimum - hope it's less brash and more to the point now - All the best

  • Delete It's still an ad. Especially with lines like 'UPFRONT specialises in all that is celebrity." Wikipedia is not free ad space, It is also not a search engine nor a web directory, so someone looking for information on celebrities would not come here without a specific celebrity in mind already. --DarkAudit 14:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • There's an excellent reference/source up now, a link to a transcipt of an article that originally appeared in the Times, a major UK newspaper. Let me know if it still isn't Kosher. Kisses Sixorgansofadmittance 16:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
It still isn't kosher. It's a link to a Google Cache of an old message board post that is no longer online, and it says nothing about the source being from The Times. wikipediatrix 16:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete for the same reasons as the Celebrities Worldwide AfD. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 01:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)



More references added - let me know if the format I have used is incorrect - these papers/magazines have made it quite clear that UPFRONT is a bona fide mover and shaker in the world of celebrity booking. They are also considered by many as a competent rival to IMDB, being a database of celebrity names. Most of the articles are regrettably not available online - can scan some copies of what articles I have (don't have copies of all of them - this is just clippings they sent me when i used them a couple of years back) Sixorgansofadmittance 11:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

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.