Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michel de Séréville

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. RL0919 (talk) 10:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Michel de Séréville

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

GNG Fail. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:04, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:04, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:04, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep for the large numbers of book/covers & illustrations claimed, for major French publishers. He has a French article, but no obituaries after his death in 2006 are used there - were there any? Also slight sentimental reasons for keeping, for the magnificent piece of peacockery I removed in 2011, & put on my user page: "He found the answers to his adolescent doubts in communication with the trees, the wind, and the Ocean… From the youngest years of his life, Michel de Séréville was impressed by the wild forces of nature.." Johnbod (talk) 04:07, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please do allow me to paraphrase: "We found the answers to his notability in book covers and illustrations but not in SIGCOV... From the youngest years of his life, Michel de Séréville was not reported on so much"ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:41, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 03:37, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per ThatMontrealIP the nom, lack of indepth significant coverage in reliable sources.Celestina007 (talk) 12:15, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NNADIGOODLUCK (Talk|Contribs) 04:22, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Having trouble seeing any English language coverage. NickCT (talk) 04:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:ARTIST.NotButtigieg (talk) 10:55, 13 January 2020 (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.