Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clare Ann Matz (2nd nomination)

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clare Ann Matz[edit]

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

Tagged for notability and other concerns for quite some time, the article subject has requested deletion. After a preliminary search I have not found sources which would demonstrate notability under WP:ARTIST or WP:BASIC, although I am mindful of one claim made in the previous AfD. --joe decker ^talk 16:47, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete When I was working on the article about her mother (Mary Jane Phillips-Matz) in 2013, I stumbled on this article in quite a disastrous state (basically, a pasted-in CV). The following is what I wrote on Talk:Clare Ann Matz in 2013 and it still applies now...

"I have extensively edited this article for encyclopedic style and tone, and added as many references as I could find. However, not only are many of the claims unsupported, there is nothing here that indicates the subject meets our notability guidelines. The references which are in the article merely confirm with name listing certain minor TV presenting jobs, the authorship of a few articles in not particularly notable publications, performance announcements, etc. I can find no reviews of any of her work and no evidence that anyone has actually written about her. The claim to having exhibited at the Venice Biennale is not quite what it seems, and was definitely misunderstood at the AfD for this article. She was simply a performance artist, one of a very large group, who presented a performance as part of the Biennale program. I'm afraid if no further references can be found showing substantial and significant coverage of this subject, it will be brought to AfD again."

Given that and the subject's request, deletion is appropriate in this case. Voceditenore (talk) 17:27, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per voceditenore.4meter4 (talk) 20:11, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I see nothing for an obviously better article. SwisterTwister talk 08:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - 4 trivial mentions in News; zip in Newspapers, Highbeam and Scholar; a few mentions in Books, but again, all trivial. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:22, 14 November 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.