Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Cozza

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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Helen Cozza

Helen Cozza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Out of the entire article, only one sentence attempts to make a claim of importance: Her work has been featured in two journal articles including Art Education, 2010 and on the cover and accompanying article of the Journal of LGBT Youth in 2007. Whether or not this artist is notable depends entirely on the weight of those things being important. Other problems: no substantial coverage that I can find, article relies on one unknown source and has no citations. The few ghits that I find are all directories. — Timneu22 · talk 10:24, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

• There are two citations listed for Helen Cozza, 2010 and 2007. Regarding the two citations: Both journals, Art Education and the Journal of LGBT Youth, are journals with both national and international audiences. Art Education has an audience of 20,000. There are very few Lesbian artists identified on Wikipedia and it is imperative these artists are included in this venue. Cozza is a noted Lesbian artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Annhardy (talk • contribs) 17:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC) <----Annhardy (talk) 17:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)>

• If she is a noted artist, then there should be coverage of her in newspapers, books etc. where she has been noted. However, this material does not appear to exist. Two citations alone do not make someone noted. Ty 17:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

• Delete - Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. And note that the belief that "it is imperative these artists are included in this venue" is not relevant if the artists does not meet notability. -- Whpq (talk) 16:41, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
• Delete The Wikipedia requirement for articles is stated at WP:N, namely coverage in multiple sources that meet WP:RS. Only two sources have been provided to date. There are only 87 Google hits[1] with nothing of sufficient substance. Ty 17:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

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.