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. Redirect at will. Sandstein 07:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yacht Shares

[edit]

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

This sham article appears to have been originally set up to hawk timeshares from companies controlled by Matthew Condon and Joseph Galati (see [1] and [2]) using a WP:Single-purpose account, Special:Contributions/Prebbleq, that was also used to post what appears to be a resume (see Prebble Q. McLaughlin). The additions for other timeshare hawkers (see [3] and [4]) appear to be an attempt to "legitimize" Condon's and Galati's businesses by referencing more well-established competitors. Note that the article on Fractional ownership already contains a section on yachts that, while more concise, contains essentially the same information as presented here without reference to particular vendors. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 09:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete trying to get this killed for a while. this page is a total sham, I've tried whittling it down before. But, if there is another article under whose umbrella this would fit, keep that one, kill this one. Vinithehat (talk) 15:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If moved to a generalized article name such as Yacht timeshare, a name that explains the general practice, rather than a shared name of a company. Web search has found a number of companies specializing in this and it appears to be a legitimate form of time sharing. Calmer Waters 09:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete After looking into in further, agree that at this time there is not a need for a separate article and viable, non-promotional prose should be moved to Fractional ownership. Calmer Waters 10:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Response I have to admit that after both your and User:Vinithehat's responses, perhaps just a WP:BOLD redirect to Fractional ownership would be a better approach. The main axe I have to grind is with "entrepreneurs" using Wikipedia for free advertising and just beyond that whether a particular article subject is likely to be a spam attractor. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 14:41, 15 January 2010 (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.