Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nate Hill (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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nate Hill (artist)

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

Did this guy do anything noteworthy? All that is linked is his terribly unprofessional webpage. And this seems like a publicity stunt. He was behind White Power Milk a few years ago, which almost gendered a blip of publicity, but not really enough. We don't need a page for every wannabe performance artist. 96.251.85.48 (talk) 05:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Completing nomination for IP, I have no opinion. Ansh6 6 6 05:59, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG.[1][2][3][4][5] Seems a notable part of the NY art world. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep - The subject passes WP:BASIC, per [6], [7], [8]. Furthermore, the nomination does not present a valid rationale for deletion. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:02, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there are plenty of web publications, meets WP:MUSBIO and WP:BASIC, also quite inappropriate nomination rationale. Alex^{discussion ★} 13:28, 20 November 2013 (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.