Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Stoner

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 speedy keep per W.marsh and others. Non-admin closure. YechielMan 16:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Stoner

Fails WP:BIO. This page has had considerable editing by its subject so I've rolled it back to the most recent non-WP:COI non-WP:AUTO version. Either version has insufficient verification of notability claims, and the claims themselves probably fail minimum standards. Durova^Charge! 16:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keep per [1], [2], [3] and having won the Beck's Futures arts prize ("Britain's richest art prize"). --W.marsh 17:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep W.Marsh has demonstrated notability. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 17:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - 30 refs in UK NewsBank newspaper archive since 2000 (Times, Independent, Guardian, even Daily Mail. Tearlach 19:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The prize is notable enough for inclusion at WP, thus I see the winners become as notable as well. As the article on the prize would be unwieldy with minor bios on all the winners, it follows that an article on eash is legitimate if the info can be verifiable etc. It seems a bit trivial, but we aren't that restrictive--Kevin Murray 22:15, 12 April 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.