Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Wear (artist)

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) 21:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Wear (artist)

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

Long term autobio/unreferenced BLP. No significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The-Pope (talk) 06:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can't find any sources to pass WP:GNG searching for his work in music or art. Nothing suggests notability via WP:BIO. Given that he was making music in the early 90s some sources could well be offline and I would reconsider if this proves to be the case, but please notify me as I might not be watching this page. Bigger digger (talk) 15:28, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wear is about to have an exhibition, and an accompanying on-line magazine article due to be published shortly.
In addition to this, Wear's new album is currently in production. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andywear (talk • contribs) 04:10, 26 November 2010 (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) 00:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete cannot find any Australian coverage for this Andy Wear. [1]. LibStar (talk) 02:07, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about these? Surely a National Library archive and a State operated gallery listing are sufficient and valid.[2][3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andywear (talk • contribs) 06:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid they are not sufficent; what we're looking for is significant coverage in reliable sources independant of the subject. -- Lear's Fool 06:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Trove returns nothing other than a library record for one book, and the lack of anything meeting the coverage requirements of the general notability guideline suggests that this individual is comfortably not notable. -- Lear's Fool 06:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment given Andywear (talk · contribs) edits, WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI also apply here. LibStar (talk) 06:48, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't find sufficient coverage in reliable, third-party sources to establish that this subject merits a standalone article. Additionally, the subject of this article should follow Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to avoid COI edits and avoid participating in this deletion discussion. -- Rrburke (talk) 17:06, 30 November 2010 (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.