Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eli Wilner

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 keep. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:44, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eli Wilner[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional / Conflict of interest: Article is a promotion created and edited by the artist (Eliwilner (talk · contribs)) and his friend (Tayloracosta (talk · contribs)). The former user has added promotional material to other Wikipedia articles. Article is heavily subject to conflicts of interest per WP:CONFLICT, as the artist's friend and he both created it / edited it.
Non-notable: Article is not linked to anywhere on Wikipedia.(WP:NOTABILITY)
Lack of sources: It does not have any high quality sources to show it's worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. (WP:SOURCES)

I propose delete due to the above reasons. -- Gokunks (Speak to me) 00:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Just curious but how has this article been assessed by two different WikiProjects before? And simply because an author has a personal connection with the subject it doesn't mean that their past edits to the subject should be reverted, only scrutinised and then discourage future editing to the article per WP:COI. --Donald Trung (Talk) (Articles) 05:51, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There are some sources out there, but they talk about his richness (has a multi-million dollar compound in the Hamptons), what he does on Sunday (NYT profile of his Sunday routine) and a couple others that talk about how he is also rich. Nothing much in terms of notability. Realistically, once you have covered the sentence "X owns a framing company" there is not much more to say.104.163.148.25 (talk) 07:33, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- There is coverage of this guy see [1] [2] [3]--Rusf10 (talk) 05:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jdcomix (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I see both sides to this argument: there are three NYT articles, but they are all lifestyle focused. The Artdaily that are on there now are NOT RS. If this article is to be kept, it needs to be absolutely gutted, b/c right now it is all COI promo cruft. --Theredproject (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:50, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources identified by Rusf10 above. FloridaArmy (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there's enough coverage, though the article needs more cleaning than the bit I've done. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:23, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep - significant coverage. PhilKnight (talk) 23:14, 4 March 2018 (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.