Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Achraf Baznani (photographer)

Achraf Baznani (photographer)

Achraf Baznani (photographer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG (in particular WP:Artist). The article shows no sign of significant coverage in RS. In addition to several points of concern:

• The article has been tagged as copyvio by a bot [1] and the tag has been removed by page creator/significant contributor with no explanation [2]
• It has been nominated for speedy because of overtly promotional tone [3], deletion tag has been removed by page creator/significant contributor [4]

Additionally, the sources present on the page do not discuss the subject's life/career in detail but are rather anecdotal. Google search yielded no coverage, and, of particular concern, no mentions on Moroccan media given that the subject is Moroccan. Tachfin (talk) 05:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• Important please pay attention if user:Maromania & user:Fevrret aren't deleting/editing any votes/comments:
  • Restored this comment (below) by me after it has been deleted by user:Maromania & user:Fevrret (same person?) [5] [6]
  • Article creator (user:Fevrret) tried to close this as "non admin closure" before being reveted [7]
  • According to the above, and other clues, we may be in a case of WP:COI or or promotional paid editing --Tachfin (talk) 06:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
• Note there is also Through My Lens (a book supposedly authored by "Achraf Baznani") which is currently being considered for speedy deletion --Tachfin (talk) 05:55, 5 September 2014 (UTC) This comment has been deleted by user:Maromania and restored in this edit --Tachfin (talk) 06:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Dont lie please! I never delete any of your comments ! Maromania (talk) 09:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

** You Tachfin just made an WP:CONSPIRACY, a very serious violation, you (as an contributor) must not do a WP:NPA to me. You got to be careful before judging without any proofs. I will be having a conversation with an admin about this. Fevrret (talk) 19:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

** Also, recommend you to assume good faith for new contributors (as seen Maromania is one of them). Stop accusing as we (Maromania and Fevrret just deleted any comment, because what I did was merging Maromania's comment as just one (which was keep). With the WP:COI you have not proofs, I am just an editor and you made a direct offense to my being, myself. The non admin disclosure was discussed and I didn't know the existent WP:NAC and reverted, and apologized to Crow for this, which he assumed my enthusiasm is great, but I need to know the rules. I will report this case to the administrators for violating WP:CONSPIRACY, WP:AGF and WP:COI without any proofs. Fevrret (talk) 19:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Dont lie please, i never delete any comment! Maromania (talk) 09:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I explained that the article was not promotional, and we discussed it over. Also other contributors expressed on the article as not being "promotional". Actually, an admin. The article is covered by major articles. The book Through My Lens is a book authored by Achraf Baznani. You (Tachfin) do not have any statement to prove wrong. Is currently featured by magazines (hereinbefore mentioned). Fevrret (talk) 18:57, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The photobook is a book authored by Achraf Baznani Maromania (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• Keep the article meets WP:BASIC and have encyclopedia importance. Is supported by third major magazines in English, Spanish, French, Arab. And has an arab wikipedia page approved by admins. Fevrret (talk) 18:57, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• There is no such thing as "an article approved by admins". I've repeatedly seen that argument being used by paid editors. If there are reliable sources that discuss the subject deeply enough to establish notability than please present them. Mearly anectdoctal mentions and promotional articles on shady websites/blogs does not implicate notability (c.f. WP:Artist) --Tachfin (talk) 06:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment I saw this go by on RC, and thought it rang a bell. Sure enough, I have Draft:Achraf Baznani on my w/l from August 30. It is identical to the initial version of the article now under discussion, which was created a day later by a different editor. Crow^Talk 19:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I never said that I created this article. I just modified it, taking by references the interviews which he is featured on. It's not identical, I modified it. Fevrret (talk) 23:49, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Of course, I'm not suggesting any impropriety, more to keep an eye out that there could be multiple copies floating around. If this article is kept, they should be merged into the live copy to avoid having multiple out-of-sync versions, and if this is deleted they should be looked at accordingly. Crow^Talk 23:58, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Morocco-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 02:37, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 02:37, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 02:38, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

• Keep - obviously, yes needs a clean up, but that's not the purpose of AFD. In ictu oculi (talk)

  @In ictu oculi:, why keep? could you elaborate please? --Tachfin (talk) 06:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Change to delete User:Tachfin I was more impressed by the number of sources than I should have been. Suggest this now goes to a long redlink salt of all possible name variations. Also someone needs to make sure the Sockpuppet documentation for blocked user Fevrret is complete. Given the amount of damage that editor was doing incidentally with other edits we don't want a reoccurrence. 00:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment I looked at the suggested sources and all that I could see are blog posts (even the CNN one is, and it says: Not verified by CNN). I would suggest getting some more reliable sources. But I do not know what the decision should be about an article in @en.wikipedia if there are no such resources in English. Anyone? LaMona (talk) 15:39, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

- LaMona, you can find some reliable sources here: Maromania (talk) 20:03, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

• Keep:

1. Notable individual showing significant coverage in independent reliable sources (see references). Artspace (one of the top galleries in New York, USA) owns works by Baznani and he has featured magazines and newspapers across the world. WP:ARTIST. Quite why the nominator thinks that the sources are not independent.
2. You can find more articles and artwork by the artist (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
3. The artist is a famous Moroccan photographer
4. The artist is moroccan, if you (Tachfin) are moroccan then you can read some newspapers about him in arabic
5. The content of this page is released under the Creative Commons Zero Waiver 1.0 (CC0). You can copy, modify, distribute and perform the work, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission Maromania (talk) 09:15, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

• X is one of the greatest is exactly the type of wording that raises red flags here. Links you've provided either: 1. Do not meet Wikipedia definition of WP:RS (anyone can create a website) 2. Are affiliated with the subject (e.g. Baznani.com) 3. Are anecdotal, insofar as they don't discuss the topic deeply enough. The only exception to this may be this: al-Quds article but it doesn't discuss the subject's life, mearly an interview of some generic stuff about his work, still short of WP:artist or even WP:GNG --Tachfin (talk) 06:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Sayidaty magazine talk about the artist Achraf Baznani Maromania (talk) 09:37, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you help editing text and words? It will be appreciated. Tachfin. Maromania (talk) 09:03, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Delete. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. Repeated recreation of overly promotional material to the extent that Achraf Baznani got salted. Bad Faithed recreation to avoid the salt. Put aside other considerations and delete this spam, stop rewarding bad faithed editing, deny the spammers the fruits of their labour. duffbeerforme (talk) 09:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

This is not promotion, the page is about an Artist Photographer. Maromania (talk) 10:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

"Achraf Baznani did not realize that he was a born artist until he got a camera as a birthday gift in his teen ages. Like many other great people that have walked the earth, Achraf Baznani also had to know it from within and by chance that he was in fact an artist." "The surrealist inside him gave the bravery to direct the short film the way that it earned him the Best Director award in more than five different awarding." "The art where it shows him standing in the middle of a chess board is an amazing idea" "the photobook has summarized the human life in very impressive manner." Yep, promotion. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you help rewriting this paragraphs? Maromania (talk) 13:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

The article will be re-written. Please learn how to write properly, it will help Wikipedia and your life. Appreciate it. Fevrret (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: As @Duffbeerforme: noted, Achraf Baznani has been deleted three times by three different sysops and slated to avoid recreation. There is actually no need to disambiguate the title as in "Achraf Baznani (photographer)" other than to avoid the scrutiny of new page patrolers and "quietly" recreate a 3X deleted article. (also note the existence of Achraf baznani) --Tachfin (talk) 05:43, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I think Achraf baznani is redirected to Achraf Baznani (photographer).Maromania (talk) 08:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

You Tachfin, the first time you dont believe that the photographer Achraf Baznani is Moroccan! Now you believe it! and you dont wont that the page about him was created! May be your are Moroccan too! anyway the artist is very known in your country. Maromania (talk) 08:35, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: COI. In addition to the copyright problems which caused me to list this article at WP:CP, there seems to be a WP:COI problem here too:

User:Maromania has for some reason chosen as a username the name of the web host of Baznani's site, Maromania

User:Fevrret is apparently well enough acquainted with Baznani to have taken this photograph of him, in a style very reminiscent of that of the photographer himself.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:09, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

The article you tagged as a WP:CP. is now being re-written on a temp article. --Fevrret (talk) 09:23, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

The photo of the artist is CC as mentionned on this page http://www.baznani.com/about-the-artist/ Maromania (talk) 15:23, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I have asked for permission to Baznani itself in order to use this photo. Making this a neutral point of view, with permission to use the photo. --Fevrret (talk) 09:23, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

• Delete. Shady behind-the-wiki whatevers aside, I looked through the sources listed. Removing the blogs, the promotional and self-published, and mirrors thereof, we're left with a small group of sources. For the most part, those contain numerous photographs, but only incidental coverage of the person. There are 2 that have the trappings of an interview, but again are superficial (just a question or 2 then a lot of photos). The sources unequivocally prove that A:he exists and B:he makes a lot of cool photographs. But little else to show notability to the level we need. Musee Magazine called him an "Emerging Artist". I think he needs to emerge a bit more to meet requirements here. Crow^Talk 23:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

• Also be aware of the discussion taking place here --Tachfin (talk) 07:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
• Delete. With no great enthusiasm. Here we have a photographer whose work is in some ways similar to what the much celebrated Slinkachu is doing, but in at least one way very different. It doesn't happen to be my thing (not that this matters at all), but it's non-negligible. Perhaps he's more notable (in the normal sense of the word) than is a photographer whose article I was bemusedly working on just an hour or so ago (because I came across it while wanting to read about the distinctly notable Alberto Schommer). This source and this one don't seem worthless. However, the boosterism here is persistent and repellent, and (copyright questions aside) the current article is a crude attempt to evade salting. So I wish his Indiegogo appeal well; let him "emerge" (as suggested by Crow above), and if/when this has happened a disinterested would-be article creator may contact Anthony Bradbury (see protection log) with clear evidence for the "emergence". -- Hoary (talk) 01:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)