The result was keep. There seems to be significant reliable sources and coverage. It needs a minor clean up though, per WP:MOS. (non-admin closure) - The Magnificentist 09:34, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Completing nomination per WP:AGF on behalf of an IP editor, whose rationale (from their edit summary) was "personal content. not content for encyclopedia.". On the merits, the article was created and exclusively edited by Gillieandmarcart ( talk · contribs), which is either a username violation or an indication of autobiography. While there are some reliable-ish sources included in the article, the vast majority are from the subject's website - never a good sign. The prose itself is problematic, as with the lead where some of the subject's work is self-described as iconic. I make no recommendation as to notability, but if there is a suitable article about these individuals, I don't think this is it. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 13:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. There seems to be significant reliable sources and coverage. It needs a minor clean up though, per WP:MOS. (non-admin closure) - The Magnificentist 09:34, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Completing nomination per WP:AGF on behalf of an IP editor, whose rationale (from their edit summary) was "personal content. not content for encyclopedia.". On the merits, the article was created and exclusively edited by Gillieandmarcart ( talk · contribs), which is either a username violation or an indication of autobiography. While there are some reliable-ish sources included in the article, the vast majority are from the subject's website - never a good sign. The prose itself is problematic, as with the lead where some of the subject's work is self-described as iconic. I make no recommendation as to notability, but if there is a suitable article about these individuals, I don't think this is it. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 13:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)