Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dylan Cole

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan Cole[edit]

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

Delete. Unreferenced bio that does not meet WP:ARTIST. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:18, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:18, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ludicrous. Someone else who has a great deal of time, please count the number of things that are wrong with this nomination. I might get upset and write something I regretted. Anarchangel (talk) 21:27, 19 February 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) 00:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - even the most cursory of searches shows the subject is notable. The article needs major cleanup, but this is no reason for deletion. Bienfuxia (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and send to WP:Cleanup. Award-winning notable artist. In this case, unreferenced does not equate to unreferencable. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:00, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note Not making it somebody else's job, I have started on cleanup and sourcing. What began as this is already looking better. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:38, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep. Nom's should do a wp:before search and focus on the refs that can be added. Meets GNG.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:00, 26 February 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.