The result was keep. While the nom had a valid point, the four cogent arguments made to keep the article are grounded in policy, and no other editor has supported deleting the article. Even though 3 of the 4 are weak keeps, the consensus is keep, albeit weakly. ( non-admin closure) Onel5969 TT me 22:13, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Biography of a modern artist that seems to fail WP:ARTIST. Lots of references/external links - and all seem to be to limited circulation, mostly offline catalogs, gallery pages selling his work, and other local/not-in-depth/unreliable sources. I couldn't find any in-depth coverage on him in GNews/GBooks; google gives social media/gallery sites... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:51, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Keep. Don't consider deleting until the following has been remedied: This is the formula for losing a promising new writer for Wikipedia. This is one of two articles submitted by the writer/editor and both are up for deletion in only a few days after creation, on the VERY FIRST ATTEMPTS AT WRITING ARTICLES. So far as I can see, no one has offered to talk to the writer to offer help, just slapped a delete tag on his/her works. There are news sources available on this subject, and if I can I will help. But I suggest that those slapping delete tags on works should start improving their own under-sourced and easy-to-label-as not-notable articles. Jacqke ( talk) 11:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Weak Keep He has an entry on imdb.com and is notable enough based on online searches. However I would be opposed to his article being a featured article TypingInTheSky ( talk) 03:11, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you all for your comments!
What shall I do as far as images copyright? I really don't understand how that works. If the image is self-photographed, then what is the issue? Shall I get a letter from the artist's studio manager to verify that these images are acceptable to use in an encyclopedic context?
I would greatly appreciate any further advice you can give me to ameliorate the status of this article, and to remove all of those flags as soon as possible.
I am myself a dedicated Wikipedia user, referring to its information on many subjects and consider the article on this artist to be a great educational resource for those interested in video art and installations.
Thank you again everyone! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulinapaulina3030 ( talk • contribs) 00:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I can confirm I am not User:Butterbeanne, but know this editor and have also used their guidance. I don't know what I can provide as proof for my identity, except that I must have my own distinct ip address. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulinapaulina3030 ( talk • contribs) 20:01, November 2, 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. While the nom had a valid point, the four cogent arguments made to keep the article are grounded in policy, and no other editor has supported deleting the article. Even though 3 of the 4 are weak keeps, the consensus is keep, albeit weakly. ( non-admin closure) Onel5969 TT me 22:13, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Biography of a modern artist that seems to fail WP:ARTIST. Lots of references/external links - and all seem to be to limited circulation, mostly offline catalogs, gallery pages selling his work, and other local/not-in-depth/unreliable sources. I couldn't find any in-depth coverage on him in GNews/GBooks; google gives social media/gallery sites... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:51, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Keep. Don't consider deleting until the following has been remedied: This is the formula for losing a promising new writer for Wikipedia. This is one of two articles submitted by the writer/editor and both are up for deletion in only a few days after creation, on the VERY FIRST ATTEMPTS AT WRITING ARTICLES. So far as I can see, no one has offered to talk to the writer to offer help, just slapped a delete tag on his/her works. There are news sources available on this subject, and if I can I will help. But I suggest that those slapping delete tags on works should start improving their own under-sourced and easy-to-label-as not-notable articles. Jacqke ( talk) 11:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Weak Keep He has an entry on imdb.com and is notable enough based on online searches. However I would be opposed to his article being a featured article TypingInTheSky ( talk) 03:11, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you all for your comments!
What shall I do as far as images copyright? I really don't understand how that works. If the image is self-photographed, then what is the issue? Shall I get a letter from the artist's studio manager to verify that these images are acceptable to use in an encyclopedic context?
I would greatly appreciate any further advice you can give me to ameliorate the status of this article, and to remove all of those flags as soon as possible.
I am myself a dedicated Wikipedia user, referring to its information on many subjects and consider the article on this artist to be a great educational resource for those interested in video art and installations.
Thank you again everyone! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulinapaulina3030 ( talk • contribs) 00:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I can confirm I am not User:Butterbeanne, but know this editor and have also used their guidance. I don't know what I can provide as proof for my identity, except that I must have my own distinct ip address. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulinapaulina3030 ( talk • contribs) 20:01, November 2, 2015 (UTC)