Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pierre Heymann

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:42, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre Heymann

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

Notability has not been established with reliable sources--instead we have a sort of press release-resume hybrid. I templated and prodded this as an IP, and am signing in to AFD. JNW (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Tricky one this. There was also an artist by the name of Pierre Heymann (see [1]) who died in 1982 and who did some quite distinguished painting in the 1950s (e.g. [2]). I couldn't find any material on the presently-living Heymann. The French wikipedia article has some inline sources but they didn't establish WP:GNG. Fiachra10003 (talk) 13:43, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not really tricky--if there's no material on the subject of this article, it's ripe for deletion. Another artist of the same name, coincidental though it may be, isn't relevant to this discussion. JNW (talk) 02:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 23:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:59, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have been unable to find significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. I will happily reconsider if good sources are found. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:- Sadly no evidence of notability. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 07:02, 4 May 2015 (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.