Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loy Chye Chuan

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. — Cirt (talk) 01:49, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Loy Chye Chuan[edit]

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

Unable to find any significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject of this unsourced BLP. J04n(talk page) 19:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. —I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} 20:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} 20:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : The article content is written based on the reference listed under Reference, in the article. The artist from Singapore is an accredited artist with numerous media coverage on his art, and contrary to the point made by J04n. More time is needed to build up the article, for the benefit of knowledge on the local art scene. -- Marcuslim (talk) 04:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The reference listed was written by the subject of the article, self-published sources are not sufficient to establish notability. J04n(talk page) 08:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It was not a self-published source, as J04n had claimed it to be. On closer look at the reference, the article was published on the International Artist magazine, written based on the interview with the subject, by the editors of the magazine title. More information on the credibility of the magazine can be found on www.international-artist.com. By and large, the subject matter warrants more citation and research to build the article, rather than deletion. -- Marcuslim (talk) 02:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. cab (call) 03:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am unable to find any references to Loy Chye Chuan in the Straits Times digital archive. Agree with nom on lack of RS. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 08:10, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see Twitter, MySpace, Facebook, his personal website, but nothing reliable or third party. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Loy, like many chinese-educated artists in Singapore, are often interviewed by the Chinese press, eg. Lianhe Zaobao. Thus, research on this artist proved to be tedious, requiring additional effort. By and large, the point of contention is with this man's credibility, and if he deserves an entry in Wikipedia. If this entry is deleted now, it will make compilation work on this talented artist, more difficult - this also cripples documentation of an important person in the Singapore art scene, given this man was one of the co-founders of the Singapore Watercolour Society. -- Marcuslim (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but, where are those Chinese press articles to be found, exactly? There's no mentions of them in the article, even of offline numbers from dusty printed archives or microfilm. Offline sources are perfectly acceptable to prove notability, but you have to actually cite them, at a minimum --- because what is available online in Chinese does nothing to convince me of notability. Searching for his Chinese name on Lianhe Zaobao's website brings up nothing. Searching the whole internet gives you 40 more hits, which consist of reposts of the catalogue of Shanghai art exhibition [1] or the list of members of Singapore's Society of Chinese Artsts [2]. Searching for his Chinese name in WorldCat or on the National Library of Singapore only brings up a book from 1995 of which he was one of the editors cab (call) 04:15, 8 July 2011 (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.