Deletion of Arkhitekton

Comment: The only references in the article are to the Wikipedia article on Architecture. Wikipedia is not, ever, a |reliable reference for a Wikipedia article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (:WP:RS)

Comment: Article is not ready for wiki. I would suggest the author take it to sandbox, read  and develop it further, then resubmit
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:CITE)

Comment: This seems to be a piece of |original research wrapped around a dictionary definition. No |evidence found in multiple searches (Google, Highbeam, Questia) that this is noted as a professional designation as seems to be the implied thrust of the article text. Similarly nothing found in UK-specific searches of The Guardian and The Independent newspaper sites. And for the specific mention of the 1968 Trades Description Act (now largely superceded): no mention there either. It is also worth noting that the contributing editor is in the process of setting up :Arkhitekton Magazine|a magazine of the same name, to be published next year, on which he has also submitted an article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (:WP:OR||:WP:RS)