Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Thwaites

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Thwaites[edit]

This person's claim to notability is a crime he committed. He is covered in news reports only in the context of this crime, for all I could find out. Hence a biography is clearly not warranted by WP:BLP1E. I'm sending this to AfD since the talk page suggests it's controversial. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 11:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The forgeries were not a single crime but rather a series of them, so WP:BLP1E may not apply. The article is a stub, and should be expanded. Note the discussion on the article's talk page about the person's correct name. --Eastmain 15:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 18:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The material is supported by the reference, and a conviction satisfies BLP concerns about inclusion. Conviction for forgery of art works is rather rare, and more appropriate here than more ordinary financial crimes. DGG 01:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to the two comments above: The coverage about R.T. is related to the two (directly related) forgeries, and the court trial that followed. Actually, coverage is shortly before or after the court trial. For me, this constitutes one event, and WP:BLP1E applies. We should not have a biographical article on R.T. If the crime as such is notable, as DGG suggests, one might think of writing an article about the crime. However "rare" does not imply "notable". As to the comments on the talk page, I strongly oppose including R.T. on the base that he is a "talented artist" with "exceptional painting skills", etc. This is pure speculation and POV. If R.T., being released from prison, becomes a well-known artist who passes WP:BIO, then we should include him, but not on the base of the current facts. --B. Wolterding 16:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not for an encyclopedia, Modernist 14:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We have a large Category:Art forgers to which I have added him. He is not the most notable, but over the bar in my view. Johnbod 17:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rewrite. Semi-illiterate language. Otherwise delete it at all.--Attilios 17:16, 30 June 2007 (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.