Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley West (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. ( X! ·  talk )  · @834  · 19:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Ashley West
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unclear that notability has ever been established; exhibition list appears slim, with no museum shows and no outside critical assessments. No reliable sources have ever been provided. Bulk of text is the artist describing his own work. Few or no Google hits other than personal website. Article's history shows that it was begun, and later expanded by, several subsequently blocked sockpuppets of one user. Notwithstanding many good-faith edits, this still does not appear to satisfy WP:CREATIVE. Is the published book of work sufficient to establish notability? JNW (talk) 23:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC) (categories) Delete no secondary sources to back any notability.  Teapot  george Talk  06:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't see how this passed the previous AfD. There are no secondary sources that refer to him, I've searched and come up with nothing. The book of his work is self-published. He's a pretty standard artist, and he doesn't warrant an encyclopedia entry. Fences  &amp;  Windows  16:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

DELETE I have been a frequent editor of this article and have tried valiantly to keep it a part of an encyclopedia that has limitless growth. Also, in the earlier discussion regarding the deletion of this article, I argued vehemently for keeping it and would even consider making some of the same arguments again but for one thing: I have searched everywhere I can think of for third-party reviews of the artist’s work and have come up empty. So, I sent an e-mail to the artist himself using the e-mail provided at his website to enquire if he might have a collection of newspaper clippings reviewing his work that might be used to flesh out his wikiarticle with third-party sources. I received a response from Mr. West on June 18, which I have only just now opened, that reads as follows: "Sorry for the delay. Please go ahead and delete my entry. Sixth form students I teach put this together, with the best intentions … but without my consent — I am a small fish! and the best place for this is a website or myspace. Thank you for seeing to this and apologies for the trouble. Regards, Ashley West." I can upload a copy of the e-mail if someone could tell me how to do such a thing on my talk page, or via e-mail (also available from my talk page). Otherwise, I think that this should put the matter to rest. — SpikeToronto (talk) 18:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Just a word of respect for Mr. West: In a Wikipedia universe where it sometimes seems that everyone is clamoring to have their own article, I admire him for his note above. The world depends upon just such 'small fish', and his students were, understandably, making clear their esteem for him. That's better than a Wikipedia bio. JNW (talk) 21:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Pictogram_voting_comment.svg|15px]] COMMENT Hear! Hear! SpikeToronto (talk) 05:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: per everything above. Can this be tagged as csd-g7 because of the e-mail? Iowateen (talk) 20:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

COMMENT I think what Iowateen might be referring to is general criteria for speedy deletion № 7, “Author requests deletion.” However, Mr. West is not the author of the article, he is merely its subject. Deleting — speedy or otherwise — a biography of a living person simply because its subject requests it would start us down a slippery slope. The biography of a living person guidelines are intended to prevent Wikipedia from running afoul of libel laws while still maintaining a database of informative articles on living persons. So long as those guidelines are adhered to, there should never be a reason to delete a biography of a living person at the mere request of its subject. The subject of the article is akin to one of us here, in the Wikipedia community: entitled only to a vote to keep or delete. I think the important point in this WP:AFD discussion is that we are not able to obtain third-party references to support the Ashley West article and satisfy the following guidelines: verifiability, neutrality, avoiding original research, reliable sources, notability, and WP:Artist. Since the article does not qualify for speedy deletion under general criteria for speedy deletion № 7, since Mr. West is its subject and not its author, we still need to follow WP:AFD guidelines and timeframes and not delete the article until a WP:AFD consensus is reached, subject to the above WP:BLP and WP:ARTIST guidelines. So far, there is not a single vote for KEEP while there are four votes for  DELETE. SpikeToronto (talk) 22:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC) P.S. According to WP:AFD, the discussion has to remain open for at least seven days. Which means this deletion discussion can be closed as per WP:AFD’s closing procedure some time after July 12 or so. SpikeToronto (talk) 05:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above...Modernist (talk) 20:14, 8 July 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.