Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dick Averns

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 no consensus. Cirt (talk) 07:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Averns[edit]

Unsourced BLP, with unclear notability and insufficient coverage in reliable sources. I had tagged the article for proposed deletion but it has been contested. snigbrook (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - no assertion of notability. Johnbod (talk) 01:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No notability Niteshift36 (talk) 04:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. (Despite me just having deleted about half of the article as copyvio.) Averns is listed in the curated CCCA database, reviewed in Artspeak, interview in artmind, Canadian Forces Artist in Residence - resulting in notable exhibition, invited speaker at York University ... not well documented, but passes WP:BIO easily. Enki H. (talk) 04:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only if some of this is added to the article; at the moment none of this is in. Johnbod (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can take care of that if we are developing a sense that the Averns won't fail notability anyway. Enki H. (talk) 12:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I find only 700 hits for Avern on Google. I know that is not the be-all and end-all but it gives a good idea of whether or not a person is notable. Setwisohi (talk) 15:08, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Fails WP:CREATIVE. CCCA database contributes to notability ("Its purpose continues to be to introduce and showcase the careers of Canada's leading professional artists and art writers") but inclusion is too broad to clinch it. The exhibition referred to above is not significant. On the other hand Artspeak and Artmind are legitimate sources, just about enough to meet WP:N, or perhaps not...--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 17:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Adding to Enki's sources, Averns is also mentioned on the University of Manitoba's School of Art, in the Art School Anatomies project, on University of Calgary's website, he may be involved in University of British Columbia Masters of Fine Art Program in Visual Art here. We don't delete BLPs merely because they are unsourced, we speedy contentious BLP content, or content which could possibly be contentious, but this is not the case here. Paraphrasing nom., there is coverage in reliable sources, the question is whether it is sufficient or insufficient coverage, I would say sufficient. Power.corrupts (talk) 18:40, 17 June 2009 (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.