Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1944 in art

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 14:46, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

1944 in art
Er, possibly a speedy candidate but it's very long. "Nelson Patrick Hawkes" gets one google hit. Xezbeth 15:44, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete, This mess. Inter 18:33, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - nonsense. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 19:24, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and direct the author to Uncyclopedia, which appears to be more their style. Average Earthman 19:28, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Too bad it's not speedyable. Denni &#9775; 20:30, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable. Megan1967 22:59, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. He is 60 so presumably entering his second childhood. -- RHaworth 02:56, 2005 Feb 21 (UTC)
 * Delete as vanity. However, the concept of a 1944 in art article is acceptable given the large number of similar articles such as 1955 in television, 1965 in film, 1999 in literature, etc. But the current contents of 1944 in art have nothing to do with this idea. 23skidoo 15:50, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete &mdash; At most 1944 in art would only list this individual under a "Year of Birth" section, and this content would go on a separate page. But he appears non-notable. &mdash; RJH 18:47, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)