Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Russell-Cowan


 * 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. No consensus to delete, good arguments for both keeping as a standalone article and merging. Since we can't do both, the best thing to do is to close this AFD and let the merge discussion continue on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Alan Russell-Cowan

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Am artist known only as he was the main person to be featured in a film of schizophrenia. His art is not notable and he will likely never be mentioned again unless connected to a dicscussion of the film. Any information here should be moved to My Name Is Alan and I Paint Pictures. Passportguy (talk) 11:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

The above film is not about schizophrenia. It's about an artist who so happens to have schizophrenia. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people) under Creative professionals it states that "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Alan and his work are both subjects of a feature-length film. It is very hard to establish notability with Artists, but obviously he was considered notabile enough for someone to make a documentary about him. Out of Phase User (talk) 15:02, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  -- kelapstick (talk) 17:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Merge to the film. The film is notable but he is not notable as an artist and his art is not notable. Available references are about the film, not about him or his art except as it figures in the film. Notability is not inherited. The film was not confirmation of his importance or significance, to the contrary, had the film not been made no one would have ever heard of him at all except for the people who pass him on the sidewalk. In addition, appearing in one film certainly does not make him notable as an actor. Another way of looking at it is remove any reference to the film and he is clearly not notable. In response to Kelapstick, if he were not schizophrenic the film would never have been made about him. Drawn Some (talk) 18:53, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I have added external links to the article to try to add some outside notability. Admitedly these do originate from Alan's website, but 3 out of 4 of them do not even mention the movie.  He has created over 1000 paintings and has sold 150 out of a single gallery (Monster Gallery) with price ranges between $200 and $2000.  These are a bit out of the point.  The main point is that he is an Artist and has become notable through a documentary made about him.  I can feel the downplaying of it all due to his schizophrenia, but often times the presence of a debilitating condition magnifies their ability to become famous in the public eye.  I agree that he is on the edge of notable, but I believe he is there, none the less.Out of Phase User (talk) 19:34, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Primary sources can be used to flesh out an article but not to establish notability. Drawn Some (talk) 20:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 15:33, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Added "as known as" Alan Streets. It is near impossible to find anything that boosts his notability like the movie does, but it should be noted that in order for interest in this movie to be made he must of already of been notable in a local Art Community (New York) which the external links to the Soho Journal attest to.  It is from this local notability which germinated a movie which boosted his national notability.  He's making and selling art.  Sure... he's not a Damien Hirst as far as international recognizability goes, but I'm sure we're not going for such a tall order.Out of Phase User (talk) 20:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Copyvio. It's copied from . I'm ambivalent about keeping an article on him, there's little out there about him aside from appearing in the documentary, but he does meet the criteria of notability. Fences and windows (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have deleted copyvio text, so the article has to be assessed with less. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:10, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Thanks for the catching of the copyvio. Despite technically being here for over a year I'm still unsure what is allowed and not allowed as far as text with references.  Included a little bit more bio info and fixed a reference.  Would be nice to see a black KEEP with respect to your agreement to the fact that it meets criteria of notability, but I'll take what I can get.Out of Phase User (talk) 03:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. With the copyvio nicely dealt with (thank you, sorry not not doing it myself) and sources noted, I think he just scrapes in. Not every street artist has a documentary film made about them, nor is every street artist written about in several reliable sources. Fences and windows (talk) 17:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge to film article for reasons detailed by Drawn Some. لenna  vecia  13:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.