Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beuron Art School


 * 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. Buck  ets  ofg 04:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Beuron Art School

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Not notable Avi 15:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Inadequately referenced. If references can be added, I'll change my opinion. WMMartin 13:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Agent 86 01:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination as unreferenced. Flyingtoaster1337 02:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Google search found many potential sources. I'll try to beef the article up a bit. --JaimeLesMaths (talk!edits) 03:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Additionally, there is an article on the topic on the German wikipedia: . I don't read German, though. But, still, working on beefing the article up. --JaimeLesMaths (talk!edits) 03:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I've added some sources and tried to explain the notability a bit more. Though the article is not great now (I am no art historian), I've tried to show that it at least has potential to be good. I'll try to work a bit more on it when I get a chance. --JaimeLesMaths (talk!edits) 03:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and leave the clean up tag User:JaimeLesMaths did a good job of making the article a starter stub. Lots of work to go on it but Wikipedia is not a race. Jeepday 05:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, kudos to JaimeLesMaths for the WP:HEY effort. --Dhartung | Talk 07:22, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. School of art is clearly notable and now contains references to verifiable reliable sources. -- Charlene 11:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup Its agood aricle but needs proper refs and general cleanup.  Telly   addict  15:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per JaimeLesMaths's references. Needs cleanup as per tag and wikification. Ronbo76 21:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Changing My Opinion. A couple of days ago ( see above ) I felt that this article should be deleted because of the poor quality of its references. Now that references have been added, and other improvements made to the article, I am changing my opinion to Keep. Kudos to JaimeLesMaths for substantial effort in improving this article, and to Trialsanderrors for additional work on references. If all AfD debates were as fruitful as this I'd be a very happy person. WMMartin 13:54, 29 January 2007 (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.