| Revision as of 00:54, 25 July 2008 editTenPoundHammer (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers278,863 edits →Animation Mentor: wk← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:24, 25 July 2008 edit undoSynergy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,794 edits →Animation Mentor: strong keepNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| A private animation school. This is almost identical to a previous version deleted as spam and created by ] who has been identified as a for-profit spammer. — ] (] | ]) 00:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | A private animation school. This is almost identical to a previous version deleted as spam and created by ] who has been identified as a for-profit spammer. — ] (] | ]) 00:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Weak keep''' because of , and , all of which turned up in a Google News search Not entirely convinced but I think it might pass. ] <small>and his otters</small> • <sup>(]• ] • ])</sup> 00:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | *'''Weak keep''' because of , and , all of which turned up in a Google News search Not entirely convinced but I think it might pass. ] <small>and his otters</small> • <sup>(]• ] • ])</sup> 00:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Strong keep'''. What screams out at me on this one is the affiliation with ], the awards, and the alumni (those of which need articles). It needs to be cleaned up, but spammers are not always a reason to delete. This seems legit, and the otters diff's above seal it for me. I recommend cleanup and additional citations for further verification be added to the article. Passes notability with flying colors. ''']'''] 14:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:24, 25 July 2008
Animation Mentor
- Animation Mentor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
A private animation school. This is almost identical to a previous version deleted as spam and created by Mrtriviamaniacman who has been identified as a for-profit spammer. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- Weak keep because of this, this and this, all of which turned up in a Google News search Not entirely convinced but I think it might pass. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 00:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- Strong keep. What screams out at me on this one is the affiliation with Sony Pictures Imageworks, the awards, and the alumni (those of which need articles). It needs to be cleaned up, but spammers are not always a reason to delete. This seems legit, and the otters diff's above seal it for me. I recommend cleanup and additional citations for further verification be added to the article. Passes notability with flying colors. Synergy 14:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)