Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Sannwald


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 05:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Daniel Sannwald

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article creator contested PROD. Photographer and director who does seem to have some notable clients, but who lacks the extensive independent coverage required by WP:GNG and who does not meet any of the criteria of WP:NCREATIVE. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:14, 3 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (see citations)  - his work in Fashion, advertising and music is discussed widely. This article brings together discussion of his work as a whole. Meets multiple criteria of WP:NCREATIVE 'The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.' - this is evidenced in the linked articles, 'The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.' evidenced in the quote from i-D Magazine. '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.' added in exhibitions that support 4b  — Preceding unsigned comment added by B e i n g b o i l e d (talk • contribs) 15:48, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * None of the citations provide in-depth coverage of him. They credit him for larger works related to other people as a director or photographer. That does not meet WP:GNG's requirement of in-depth coverage. The I-D piece is promotional of its own material, and does not show he has met the requirements of NCREATIVE. This page also seems to be promotional in nature, which is against Wikipedia's policies. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Have added in two more citations from reputable sources that provide in-depth coverage of him. Not sure where the line inbetween establishing someone as significant/being promotional is, but definitely not intended to be promotional - the article is purely factual and brings together information from various sources to provide an overview of him B e i n g b o i l e d (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Has worked at the peak of his industry in multiple publications, has exhibited internationally, and had a profile in Le Monde. Wikipedia should clearly be covering artists of this level. SFB 19:29, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:52, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Sources do show significance. CaseeArt Talk 03:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 06:48, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 06:48, 18 February 2017 (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.