Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Mamou-Mani


 * 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   no consensus. Black Kite (talk) 16:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Arthur Mamou-Mani

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A very new article alleged to be A7 eligible, however this guys won a few awards and has some publicity; enough, I think, to warrant an afd rather than csd for the article. TomStar81 (Talk) 17:30, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I think this article should stay, he has won awards and he is very notable for a Wikipedia article. His work(s) make him notable and I advise that this article stays! He also did a TedX speech, so that also makes him notable! Hopefully, editors will come to an agreement, that this article should stay. CookieMonster755 (talk) 03:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)CookieMonster755


 * Keep : I fully support the exercice motivating tech revolutions. Now, I'm sorry to say the 5 sources are either MMani' website, MMani's platform, MMani's special school award, or MMani's appliance for the Black Rock "outdoor, poor quality sound" TEDX experience. Make no mistake, this guy is cool, but you're not helping him in having him banished in 6 months from WP, for "Total" lacking of Secondary sources, which he will obviously be afterwards. Actually, he should be at the state of Draft to give him the proper time to make a perfect page without risking the deletion process.KratorOne (talk) 10:21, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * -- I just wanted to tell you cussing on Wikipedia is not appropriate, and secondly, Its fine if the article is deleted, but if there is more secondary sources I can find about Arthur, I will be adding them to his article as references. Thanks!! CookieMonster755 (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)CookieMonster755
 * You're absolutely right. I changed the sentence.KratorOne (talk) 21:51, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * So who's going to make the final decision if the article stays or leaves? --CookieMonster755 (talk) 23:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)CookieMonster755
 * I added the category : 3D printers on MM's page. I will change my vote, if MM gets the sources needed, as we can find them on Adrian Bowyer, Bre Pettis and 3D printers pages, as The New York Times, The Guardian or Wired, which are the true confirmations of notability. Have you found this kind of sources ? KratorOne (talk) 09:11, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Guys, I have added several sources which I hope you will find valid enough, Forbes, Wired, Develop3D, Karen Millen's website, World Architecture News, Hypecask3D Printers, ARUP Associates. I also added another project which used laser-cutting to show the different use of tech in my practice. I hope the article can stay now. In any case, it is an honour that someone thought i deserved an article here and it made my parents very proud so thank you CookieMonster755. --mamoumani (talk) 11:08, 15 December 2014 (GMC)mamoumani
 * Forbes is a good example of what is considered as a reliable source (secondary source) but blogs are traditionally erased automatically. Now, you will face the second problem with the sources. They have to be centered on the person concerned. What is needed here is a full portrait of MM in this kind of magazine. Can you find it ?KratorOne (talk) 11:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. I was interviewed very recently in Shanghai Daily, which is an important printed and online newspaper in China, where I did my last 3D Printed project. I have added the link as well as the two main exhibitions that I did in China and the UK with links too. --mamoumani (talk) 16:15, 16 December 2014 (GMC)mamoumani
 * Fine with me. Welcome on board, captain ! ;-)KratorOne (talk) 20:09, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * So who makes the choice of removing the deletion tag? CookieMonster755 (talk) 01:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)CookieMonster755
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  17:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  17:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions.   18:18, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Are you Mamou-Mani? The "I was interviewed...." and the fact that KratorOne is an SPA on that article sure looks like a WP:COI issue. LaMona (talk) 17:07, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not. I was quite against MM's validity in the beginning. But we have to admit the sources are now serious enough to accept him on WP.KratorOne (talk) 23:28, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * There is enough reliable sources, can we remove the deletion tag? CookieMonster755 (talk) 03:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)CookieMonster755
 * No. The deletion tag is not to be removed until the discussion here is closed by an admin, and that takes a week - sometimes more if the discussion needs more input. Just be patient and let this run its course, it'll be over before you know it. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:37, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply TomStar81 — CookieMonster755 (talk) 01:07, 20 December 2014 (UTC)CookieMonster755

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:37, 20 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:12, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: sources suffer from either a lack of independence, significant coverage, or reliability. I don't think a Ted talk guarantees a wikipedia article.  Entertaining puppet conversations though. Vrac (talk) 01:58, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - This is not a "puppet" conversation .. CookieMonster755 (talk) 21:34, 27 December 2014 (UTC)CookieMonster755

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CookieMonster755 11:09, 04 January 2015 (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.