Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Stedman


 * 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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Daniel Stedman

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable person with no apparent reason or justification for having an article on Wikipedia. Laval (talk) 04:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 
 * Keep Passes WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE. Here is an article from The Boston Globe, while here is one from the Montreal Mirror. Both of these news articles are significant, reliable coverage of this individual. This article from The Advocate verifies that Stedman won the Teddy Award. Cunard (talk) 05:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Two articles about this artist winning a minor award do not seem to justify an article on WP. How much could even be written about him that is verifiable other than this award? Perhaps in a few years, but now? Laval (talk) 04:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Cunard's references. Material seems verifiable, subject seems to be reasonably notable having won a significant award (significant enough for international news coverage, at least).  --TeaDrinker (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: According to WP:N, a couple of articles about a minor award are not sufficient to establish notability. Aside from this award, there is barely anything else verifiable to add to his extremely short article. A line must be drawn as to what is acceptable to WP and what is not. Laval (talk) 04:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The first two news articles I cited prove that Stedman passes WP:GNG. In addition to giving information about him winning the award, the articles also lists his other achievements and information about his personal life. Cunard (talk) 04:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete -- The award is a minor one... not an overall award, but one of many given out and in a very specific subcategory. The articles cited are quite short, not showing a major focus on him in any real way. He may meet WP:CREATIVE some day, but not there yet. DreamGuy (talk) 14:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep As per with Cunard, but I see no information that makes him worty of a Wikipedia article. Renaissancee (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I think there's enough notability to warrant inclusion. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:40, 15 May 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.