Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Oxtoby, Artist


 * 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) – Davey 2010 Talk 23:35, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

David Oxtoby, Artist

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Untractable and unusable biography of an artist who might be notable. A Google search for "David Oxtoby artist" brings up a number of relevant hits about gallery shows and bios at different galleries, but it's not clear from that whether he would pass muster. But even if he does, this current article is such a mess of unverifiable facts that we'd need to blow it up and start completely anew. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:BLPPROD applies as well. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - kaboom!!! Just deleted 99% of the article and added three references. It was kind of you not to go speedy on this one as I think it would have been gone already due to lacking any references. The reference from the Independent is in depth but I am searching for another in depth before leaving a !vote. --TTTommy111 (talk) 17:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep, at a much reduced size. He shows up in two notable collections: the Victoria and Albert Museum and the National Portrait Gallery in London. They have a couple of his pieces-- enough to say that they have a little slice of that era. I'd say that, along with the album covers for notable musicians, carries the notability claim. The blow-up of the article seems to have brought it down to a size that is about 20% of the size it should be, which is much preferred over being 6000% of the size it should be. New Media Theorist (talk) 03:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, at a much reduced size, per last comment. More could be added from the short museum bios & Indie. And rename after this please. Johnbod (talk) 03:39, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep as although my searches found no better results than this and this, I suppose the new version is more acceptable. SwisterTwister   talk  06:25, 6 September 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.