Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michelle Kaufmann
Sometime ago, there was a deletion discussion regarding a wikiarticle on the British artist, Ashley West, in which I participated. (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley West (2nd nomination)|here.) At that time, there were two issues: |verifiability and |notability. Regarding verifiability, everything that was said about him was verifiable from the listings that accompanied gallery showings, but a great deal of the material came from the artist’s website and curriculum vitae|CV, not the |best sources. Regarding notability, if those were the only sources with material about the artist, and there were no reviews, write-ups, etc., about his work, then was he |notable? At that point, I personally wrote the artist enquiring whether he had any clippings of reviews, etc., from his shows. I received back from him that he really did not want the article on Wikipedia as he did not think he was that notable, and that the article had been put up by some appreciative students. (I believe that an |OTRS ticket was created for the email.) Did his not wanting the article on Wikipedia mean that it got deleted? Short answer: No. It got deleted because the dearth of independent, third-party |articles about him meant that he was not sufficiently |notable. Long answer: His not wanting the article on Wikipedia would not have gotten the article deleted by itself. However, coupled with the dearth of independent, third-party material about him, deletion was ensured
— User:SpikeToronto, 05:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:ARTIST||WP:OTRS||WP:RS||WP:ARTIST||WP:verifiability||WP:notability (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)