Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ingrid Kamerbeek


 * 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 of the debate was userfy. Johnleemk | Talk 06:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Ingrid Kamerbeek

 * See also: Articles for deletion/Rodney Chang.


 * See also: Archive of deleted article Votes for deletion/Webism (Artists Dr. Rodney Chang (Pygoya)/USA, Ingrid Kamerbeek/Germany)


 * The article Webism was put to Wikipedia End of 2004.. Neither Dr. Chang nor myself did know this. We were not informed. We as the founders of Webism Movement never had the chance to give facts. Everybody interested should read the Webism deletion debate in a. m. link. Now at the beginning of 2006 everybody can easily find out . Webism is alive worldwide! Even published as Art Movement in a book by Webist Dr. Michael Schetsche "Die Google-Gesellschaft" (The Google Society). - Webism feature. More info on Webism worldwide activities on- and offline.
 * If you believe that the article needs to be re-created you can request a deletion review. You can read Deletion_review and Undeletion_policy for more information on the process. Please keep this page for discussing the proposed deletion of the article Ingrid Kamerbeek. Thanks. &asymp; jossi  &asymp; t &bull; @ 19:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Autobiography (by user User:Artingrid, Non-notable/vanity. Userfy (Delete and move content to User:Artingrid). &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 16:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - almost 20k Google hits. Userfy. Most of those hits are duplicates. Johnleemk | Talk 05:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * WOW! You are 15 years old??? Did I get this right? But no matter how old you are a decision to keep or delete an entry for sure shouldn't be based solely on Google hits.Artingrid 11:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Userfy per nom. Werdna648T/C\@ 10:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Userfy gladly. I must have triggered the RCP when I moved it from Artingrid to its current name, but I wasn't prepared to AfD it. Stifle 16:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Neutrality is a main principle at Wikipedia, right?Artingrid 14:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is. But may not be what you think it is. Please read: WP:NPOV &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 16:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes. I read this. Neutrality is not a human quality as we all know. And it should not only concern the editor of an article.Artingrid 16:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Also:
 * Could it be that German Wikipedia section has other principles than the English section?
 * At Wikipedia Germany it is stated that an admin should propose new articles for deletion only as the outermost thing to do. He should consider every other aspect prior to putting an entry to the AfD list. He should be a helper of good willed editors not a hindrance.Artingrid 16:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Userfy. This seems to follow almost the same principles as Rodney Chang; but there seems to be a bit more external support for Chang than for Kamerbeek.  Both seem to be at the border of notability (and both pages were sloppy vanity jobs, as initially created); but Chang seems to nudge past notability threshold, and Kamerbeek doesn't. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The above (read: below) comment was meant for the Rodney Chang Deletion Discussion page but it was closed quickly. So I put it here because this is true for my entry too:

Here is a note which I wanted to post at the Deletion Discussion Page but found out it was closed in rush. Find out why:

1st of all for admin Jossi - Wikipedia Newcomer policy:  Please read.

On January 4th, 2006 it was the 1st time I looked up Wikipedia. I set up the article "Rodney Chang" in good faith. Dr. Chang is a well-known artist with good reputation and he has nothing to proof. 10 degrees including 2 doctorates. That alone is more than the usual human achieves in a lifetime. Out of the blue I found myself in court. This court calls itself Wikipedia. And claims to be an open-source. Nobody tried to assist me as newbie, vice versa.

Moreover I found out that the admin is a digital artist himself like Dr. Rodney Chang (Pygoya). Dr. Chang is worldwide known as digital artist and cyberart pioneer. Jossi Fresco, the admin, is not. Jossi Fresco has set up the below announced articles at Wikipedia. Jossi Fresco is not in the Wikipedia encyclopedia.

But he puts himself there by self-promoting his images along with texts about digital art. This is a clear conflict of interest. He cannot act from a neutral point of view. Could it be here is an admin who tries to hinder a worldwide known digital artist with good reputation and proven third-party achievements to get the place he clearly deserves?

Could it be he wants to keep his power position as an admin with special powers at Wikipedia to keep his reign over the digital artist area online at Wikipedia?

Some facts which speak for themselves. The admin Jossi is editor of the following Wikipedia entries:

Digital Art

He himself uploaded 2 of his own images to represent the theme. Is this a neutral point of view? He promotes his artwork in an article uploaded by himself using his art to demonstrates what digital art is. Is he so well-known to do so? Is his art accepted worldwide? Dr. Chang's is.

Search Google for Jossi Fresco. Search Google for Pygoya

Here's a third party view:

On the discussion page of  Jhocking says:

Along the same lines, however, I just realized yesterday that the example images further up the page are both by a single artist, and he added them himself. *cough* self-promotion *cough* Jhocking

Digital Painting

Again Jossi shows one of his images as self-promotion.

Moreover watch the weblinks from this site. And note the images of whom to find there! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artingrid (talk • contribs)


 * Ingrid:
 * You can discuss these articles at Talk:Digital art and Talk:Digital painting. You are welcome to improve these articles.
 * It you belive that I have abused my role as an administrator of Wikipedia please read: Administrators
 * If you want to further discuss this matter, I invite you to do so in my talk page: User talk:Jossi
 * Jossi 15:47, 14 January 2006 (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.

A special note:
Because you now also mention Webism! So you know what is going on at Wikipedia. Dr. Chang and I didn't know about Wikipedia behavior till January 4th, 2006. But we found out! Of course the admin doesn't stand for Wikipedia. But he represents Wikipedia.

The article Webism was put to Wikipedia End of 2004. Neither Dr. Chang nor myself did know this. We were not informed. We as the founders of Webism Movement never had the chance to give facts. Everybody interest should read the Webism deletion debate. It speaks for itself.

I am very glad Wikipedia (or at least some of its members) documents its impotence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artingrid (talk • contribs)