Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David L. Smith (artist)

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. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 00:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David L. Smith (artist)[edit]

This page does not assert notability on a scale deserving of an encyclopedia. He may be well known on a local scale but an artist should be world famous or at least nationally famous in order to have an article.--Joebengo 23:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree that I don't see any real claim of notability here. He seems to have had a successful career as a artist, but not perhaps much beyond the normal for a art professor. Brianyoumans 00:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments: Does he pass the Google test? Is this orginal research? Is there any way to Keep and Clean up the article with sources? I don't know enough about the subject to fix it myself. Bearian 00:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He doesnt pass the Google test (I checked) and the only thing about him is how he teaches art at the art institute.--Joebengo 05:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did some research and found that the user who created this article attended the school where this art teacher taught during the same time. Possibly this was a former art teacher of the user who created the article.--Joebengo 18:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment leaning keep but without proper sources, it's a bit hard to argue. Pascal.Tesson 18:40, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Inadequate assertion of notability. And seeing how Dayton isn't exactly a hotbed of art critics and galleries, it's doubtful that the subject is of anything beyond minor local interest. Caknuck 22:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with the comments above. Seems to be only of local interest. Fails google test, so there are no references for us to include even if he were notable. Rookwood^{Dept. of Mysteries} 22:29, 7 April 2007 (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.