Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ludwik Konarzewski-junior

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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ludwik Konarzewski-junior

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

No special notability asserted. No evidence f any particular notability. No in-line citations and ISBN is unrecognised for book listed in "Further reading". Some evidence of WP:COI in the authorship of this article Velella ^{Velella Talk} 12:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. Abstain. No major Google Book hits (as in, no biography, even footnote-size); he is mentioned as a creator of several works in a dozen or so books. He has a footnote bio in an (online only?) article at [1] (notable Polish newspaper, Nasz Dziennik). He is one of the subjects (but not the only one) in an article describing his family's artistic history, at a regional Polish portal/newspaper ([2]). Inconsequential mention in [3]. Two offline sources impossible to verify; one of them is supposedly an article dedicated to him in a magazine that doesn't have an entry on pl wiki. Nope, not seeing enough to save it. PS. Pl wiki deletion discussion started at pl:Wikipedia:Poczekalnia/biografie/2014:02:03:Ludwik Konarzewski (junior). PPS. Polish wiki editors were able to find some better sources; two local newspaper mentions at [4] and [5] show regional notability. As this is now too borderline for my tastes, I am changing to abstain. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A local artist with somewhat limited exposure, but a square is named after him. I'd say, it would be probably procedural in here. Now cleaned up with greatly expanded reference section. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 17:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as he seems to have quite a bit of info, the place he's from needs some "claim to fame" and his Dad's page is even smaller and isn't marked for deletion - could do with some pictures of his art or his statues though. Note: I tend to swerve towards keeping things unless there's a really good reason not to. Escottf (talk) 16:32, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:54, 6 February 2014 (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.