Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexis Marcou (2nd nomination)


 * 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 delete. Randykitty (talk) 16:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Alexis Marcou
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The !keepers in the previous AFD all appear to be either undisclosed paid editors or have some link to the subject. There were no sources presented to demonstrate that either WP:NARTIST or WP:BIO were met. From what I can see, none of the sources listed in the article demonstrate any significant impact, and BIO is definitely not satisfied. My own searches have not turned up anything better. SmartSE (talk) 20:30, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete There is a dearth of secondary, independent coverage in reliable sources. There has been no persistent and in-depth coverage in news outlets or the literature. Fails both both the general nobility guidelines and WP:ANYBIO., please remember to asume good faith from your fellow editors, a quality that was singularly lacking at AN/I. —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap sh*t room 09:08, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete there is so much self-promotion going on here that WP:TNT is the only reasonable way to go. Some sources may establish marginal notability, but all of them have been blended into a piece of promotional writing that makes it impossible to assess the article objectively.96.127.242.226 (talk) 23:15, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Even if there is a borderline notability, the article so promotional in it's tone. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:AUTHOR also applies to visual artists. The references suggest that he passes at least point 1. And promotional tone can be edited out.
 * Authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals:
 * The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
 * The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.
 * The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

And any promotional tone can be edited out. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 16:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Which references do you think demonstrate that are regarded as important? SmartSE (talk) 16:11, 8 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm in agreement with IP and Arthistorian1977 that it even if Marcou is notable, it is so promotional that it needs a TNT. --Theredproject (talk) 15:44, 12 July 2018 (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.