Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arsen Panosyan


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  03:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Arsen Panosyan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't find any sources in English which establishes that the subject passes GNG. The sources provided are only in Armenian and a quick internet search turns up little results on the subject. Fails WP:GNG Class455fan1 (talk) 23:35, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 12:28, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: There isn't much at all in English, but he's listed as a "Famous Master" with a little cross-confirmation of other sources in this UNESCO nomination. The article states he won the Khorenatsi medal in 2004 (Armenia's highest cultural honour) and the Armenian wiki that he won international awards including in the USSR -- both of which crossreference with this. There's evidence here, here, here and possibly here of apparently independent coverage of him and/or his work. He passes ANYBIO/ARTIST, however the article needs to be properly referenced with sources, and if available these are likely to be in Armenian or possibly Russian, and may be offline. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 12:28, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is the case that no english sources are available, then this article would be better placed on the Armenian Wikipedia, not here. Also, some of the sources you have provided (YouTube and OK.ru) may not be reliable sources. See WP:YOUTUBE. Class455fan1 (talk) 12:38, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * no, if the subject is notable, then an article can be on the English wikipedia, see WP:GNG - "Sources do not have to be available online or written in English." and WP:NOENG - "Citations to non-English sources are allowed on English Wikipedia.". Coolabahapple (talk) 16:01, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:53, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep per User:Hydronium Hydroxide. Sources don't have to be in the English language. WaggersTALK  12:33, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment One thing I sometimes do for artists to get a rough feel for their notability is to check what the Google image results are for their name + artist (e.g. Arsen Panosyan artist). Interestingly, basically nothing comes up for this artist beyond a few still images from the Youtube pages, four wikiepdia-hosted images and a few blogspot-hosted images. Setting aside language, I think it might be correct to be dubious of this artist's notability, as even in another language I do not see much. The Youtube and wiki links given above are irrelevant for obvious reliability reasons. The Unesco document is also not valuable as a reference since government assessment work is often governed by other criteria such as balancing assessment commmittee members by location, ethnicity, gender etc. So the Unesco document is not a stamp of approval and is not intended as such. Beyond that I am not seeing much.HappyValleyEditor (talk) 07:15, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That's the whole reason why I nominated this for deletion. There is no significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. Still fails GNG. Class455fan1 (talk) 08:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete instead as he may be known locally but there are also no collections so that's something missing for the notability, then there's also the number of sources which is simply not enough to support this article. SwisterTwister   talk  06:16, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sources identified here indicate sufficient notability. --Michig (talk) 07:24, 25 June 2016 (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.