Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enzo Marra

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Enzo Marra[edit]

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

There is no evidence that this article satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Almost all the references are on websites of organisations that have either sold or exhibited his work, most of them do no more than include his name in a list, and none gives more than a couple of sentences about him. Several of the references are dead links, and a couple are by Marra, not about him. None of them constitutes substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. An attempt is made in the article to make him seem significant by listing a string of what appear to be awards, but examination of the awards paints a different picture than a quick glance at the list in the article might suggest. Most of the things that he is said to have been "selected" for merely mean that he took part in an exhibition or had his work included in an anthology, despite being included in a list of things the first couple of which include the word "prize". Moreover, even in those cases where the word "prize" appears, Marra did not win the prize referred to. For example, the article says that Marra "has been selected for the John Moores Painting Prize 2012", but checking the website of the Walker art gallery, it becomes clear that "has been selected for" does not mean "has won": it merely means that he was one of 62 artists who were allowed to compete. He was not one of the six prize winners, as can be seen from the list of prize winners. Similarly he was not one of the winners for the Threadneedle Prize 2012, or the Threadneedle Prize 2010. Searching elsewhere for evidence of notability produces Wikipedia; Linkedin; FaceBook; websites of businesses selling his work and galleries that have exhibited it; a site that describes itself as "social networking site for the artworld", and that clearly publishes artists' own content about themselves; an announcement of an exhibition, with all the appearance of being a press release; etc etc, with no sign of any coverage in independent reliable sources. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator's arguments. Qworty (talk) 12:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - doesn't meet the threshold. Johnbod (talk) 14:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:ARTIST, WP:BIO and WP:GNG. ukexpat (talk) 16:06, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- NN as yet. It is noteworthy that none of the prizes he has allegedly on has an article. Peterkingiron (talk) 09:53, 2 February 2013 (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.