This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Created this stub because it was originally created with copyright, promotion, and sourcing problems, copied from the French article (fr:Galerie Brame & Lorenceau) (nominated for AfD and then speedied). It's clearly notable, however, so a stub starting from scratch seems preferable to nothing. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 18:28, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
Sometimes I find the deletion process(es) confusing. This article was nominated at Afd and then speedy-deleted under criterion G11 advertising/promotion. Since the CSD says, "Before nominating a page for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub... or handled in some other way." (emphasis added). So now it's a stub, and I wonder why one couldn't have avoided a speedy and just replaced the article with this stub in the first place? Why waste all that time and effort of the process just to get to the same result? Mathglot (talk) 20:26, 14 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Mathglot: Not sure what you mean here. I came across the article nominated for deletion. It was entirely promotional, with some copyright issues on top. Very shortly after it was deleted, I created a stub. I presume your question was "Why didn't whoever nominated it for deletion just turn it into a stub" (because the two aren't linked -- nobody had to create a stub to replace it; the problem was a problematic article) or "why did you [referring to me] !vote delete at the AfD if you were going to create a stub anyway" (because that would keep the promotional text and copyright issues in the article history. it was a WP:TNT). — Rhododendritestalk \\ 22:26, 14 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
No, not referring to you, it was more your presumed question. Thanks for the response. Mathglot (talk) 00:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
