Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janina Buzunaite-Zukaitiene


 * 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. Courcelles 08:15, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Janina Buzunaite-Zukaitiene

 * – ( View AfD View log )

References do not establish notability and article reads more as a living eulogy than an encylopaedia article. Reichsfürst (talk) 15:14, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * These sources linked in the article have significant coverage of the subject: . Is the nominator claiming that they are not reliable, or that thay are not independent of the subject? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Being mentioned in an article is not sufficient to establish notability, please see Notability (people). The majority of the links are simply mentions of her name. There are millions of artists who have an exhibition somewhere or other and been mentioned but this does not mean they are notable. The article would have to be entirely rewritten even if she were to be deemed notable - for instance, the most important paragraph, the one on her career is totally unencyclopaedic. Reichsfürst (talk) 19:25, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * All of the sources that I linked are about the subject, not simply mentions of her name. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Then I might draw your attention to or  or  or . Reichsfürst (talk) 20:14, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Why should I be paying any attention to those? What matters is that the subject has received significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The fact that she has also received passing mentions elsewhere doesn't subtract from notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Those are your sources...I got them from the wikipedia page...Reichsfürst (talk) 23:44, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * How does that make them "my" sources? And even if they were "mine", the point still stands that they don't subtract from any notability demonstrated by the sources that I linked above. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 15:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Coverage pointed out by Phil Bridger meets notability. -- Whpq (talk) 16:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I think the sources that have turned up indicate that she meets WP:BIO. Qrsdogg (talk) 17:53, 27 June 2011 (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.