Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex De Pase
I'm seeing a lot of mentions of him, but nothing that is actually in-depth coverage of his work. I know that while tattoo art has become more mainstream lately, it still doesn't get a lot of attention news-wise unless you happen to be one of the bigger faces on one of the TV shows (Kat Von D) or put out a line that goes mainstream (Ed Hardy). However, this does not exempt the artist from having to pass , , or any of the basics of . Just because someone is well known within a niche does not mean that this translates into Wikipedia notability. Unfortunately there's not a lot of tattoo magazines and the like that are considered to be notable per Wikipedia's guidelines and most often than not, when someone ''does'' get into a magazine, it's usually that their artwork is shown on a page without there being any actual article about the artist. The artwork is featured, but is not '''the''' focal point of the magazine, which I'm 99.9% certain is the case here. Now the thing about  is that artwork can get an artist recognized, but there has to be evidence to show that the artwork has "won significant critical attention" (usually translates into big fancy pants awards), which I'm not really seeing here. I see a lot of name dropping, but not anything to show that he's created any technique that has become a big significant thing, that his artwork is widely recognized, or that he's really all that widely cited. Most of his coverage is rather limited and while again, I know that the tattoo world is still a niche, that doesn't mean that there aren't avenues for in-depth coverage. That coverage just doesn't exist and De Pase just doesn't fit within the very strict notability guidelines that is required for a person to have an article devoted to them here on Wikipedia. Managing festivals is great, but that doesn't give notability. I looked into the awards and recognition that he's supposed to have won, but I don't see where they're considered to be major awards or recognitions that '''''Wikipedia''''' considers to be major enough to warrant an article. When it comes to this sort of thing, 99.9% of any awards or recognition will not be big or notable enough to give notability in and of itself. I know that not everyone can win an Oscar or a Nobel prize, but winning recognition from Rebel Ink isn't something that would give absolute and total notability to where it'd keep the article by itself. It would be usable as a source to show notability, but unfortunately the link given was for a facebook link. We can't use facebook as a RS. If someone can post another source and show that this coverage is actually in-depth and not just a list of people with featured artwork, then it'd show notability. As far as The Chaudesaigues Award goes, that in itself does not appear to be a notable award, so being on the panel judging does not show notability. Even if it was an award that is considered notable per Wikipedia, being a judge does not give someone notability. (Being a judge for the Oscars does not give notability either
— NONE, NONE
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:ARTIST||WP:BIO||WP:ARTIST (Wikipedia:Notability)