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 keep‎. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm ^{scrutinize, talk} 21:55, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The European Fine Art Fair (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

violates WP:PROMO, feels like WP:TNT is necessary to cleanup the promo unencyclopedic verbiage. Lavalizard101 (talk) 20:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Netherlands. Lavalizard101 (talk) 20:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - clearly notable. There are 38 refs. Not all count for notability but there are more than enough. Many more are out there. "Deletion ≠ cleanup."

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:58, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Organizations. Skynxnex (talk) 00:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This in-depth [Wall Street Journal] was more than sufficient to convince me this article has significant coverage from international, independent reliable sources. This 35 year old event is getting coverage on multiple continents from business, art, and news sources. There are around 40 references in the article. These aren't trivial mentions in local sources: it includes Bloomberg, Business Week, The New York Times, The Art Newspaper. Deletion is not cleanup. WP:TNT is an essay that is not 100% without merit, but TNT should be a last resort, not the first option. Jacona (talk) 11:43, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It's been tagged as advertorial since 2015, how long should we give it before TNTing? Lavalizard101 (talk) 14:25, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It's been tagged as advertorial since 2015, how long should we give it before TNTing? Lavalizard101 (talk) 14:25, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Fix the article rather than deleting it. Deletion of a WP:N article isn’t a great plan. — Jacona (talk) 00:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, goes along with my observation that for some editors Wikipedia is running out of things to do. This page is clearly notable by being both well sourced and about a popular art fair. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep TNT is needed, and there may be some copyvio, but there's more than sufficient sourcing on which to build a neutral article. Star Mississippi 13:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and do not TNT – although if there is plagiarism those bits should definitely be removed. Not a sentence of this article reads as promotional to me. Superlatives like "the world's leading art fair [alongside Art Basel]" are backed up, in that instance with a New York Times citation (though that article's behind a paywall for me, as are many of the ones cited – fortunately here's Reuters calling it "the world’s leading fair", with "art fair" implied). Ham II (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as this is clearly not TNT material and AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Does pass the WP:GNG. WP:SNOW also applies! gidonb (talk) 00:47, 9 August 2023 (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.