Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ha-Ha (street artist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. MBisanz talk 01:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ha-Ha (street artist)[edit]

Ha-Ha (street artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seemingly NN street artist. Lots of reposting of the text of the Wikipedia article can be found and quite a few shop sites featuring his/her work, but other than the Rash documentary (whose web site had no details on this artist but does on others) no real coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. The Dissident Aggressor 21:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 00:04, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 00:18, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as I'm simply not seeing any obvious improvement. SwisterTwister talk 07:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete completely lacking reliable sources. LibStar (talk) 11:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - searches did not turn up enough in-depth material to show they meet notability criteria. Onel5969 TT me 13:42, 26 October 2015 (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.