Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin swaby


 * 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   delete. — A itias  //  discussion  19:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Justin swaby

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

Non-notable artist; appears to be vanity article mhking (talk) 04:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Justin Swaby is an Artist worth of note on Wikipedia. referenced in the link at USA today an obviously reputable source of Swaby's notoriety as for his interview with minorprogression.com

Swaby was also recently hired by the EYE booking agency of Los Angeles California to create posters for Mike Watts up and coming events and shows and his work has been excepted by their comity following the approval of Mike Watts himself.

I ask that you leave the entry up for a type of probational period allowing others to contribute their creditable knowledge of the artist therefore offering this artists name the right to have itself approved by the general public not just the verification of oneself (MHking) —Preceding unsigned comment added by WildOrganisms (talk • contribs) 04:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)  — WildOrganisms (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. He is also the article creator
 * The articles for deletion process lasts seven days. That should be ample time for you to improve the article and show the subject to be notable. Nosleep  break my slumber 06:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

also please take the time to do some menial research to justify you're assumptions of another humans importance in sub-cultures you may not be familiar with  --76.103.138.255 (talk) 05:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC) — 76.103.138.255 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete Google News has nothing, and the only hits on a normal search are social networking sites and something about high school basketball. No indication of notability per WP:ARTIST. Nosleep  break my slumber 06:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong delete per nom. WP is not Myspace. Article on a non-notable artist written by a single purpose account. Likely WP:COI. Article is not adequately sourced. Ohconfucius (talk) 09:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable, self-promotional spam. Drawn Some (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as spam. Wikipedia is not the place to post your resume. Edward321 (talk) 13:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/stickfigureart http://content.usatoday.com/topics/article/Sam%20Brown/0eWg7PQ4NR38k/3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.33.186 (talk) 16:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC) — 64.183.33.186 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Do not delete Why can't this artist have representation on wikipedia? Are only mainstream artists whose works sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars worthy of inclusion? That seems really silly and elitist to me. His artwork is fresh and original and mention of him exists beyond MySpace- see Trendhunter magazine and USA Today links below:
 * See WP:ARTIST. Maybe one day he will satisfy notability requirements for Wikipedia and then he can have an article. Drawn Some (talk) 17:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate colleciton of information--Unionhawk Talk 23:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The "USA Today" link looks to be someone using the USA Today website as a version of Digg. It just links to the Trendhunter (and what is that exactly?) article. Nosleep  break my slumber 21:58, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

this is not a resume, it is posted as a short set of facts. nothing in this gives any representation of an Resume. reform your idea of resume and educate yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.138.255 (talk) 01:08, 14 May 2009 (UTC) it is also a gross inconsideration due to the fact that this is eligible for entry Wikipedia is an internet based free encyclopedia that was intended to outstretch the hands of the more primitive versions of encyclopedias, yet has given a certain few the ability to remove something people think is relevant beyond your knowledge of the subjects and sub-cultures in which you have no understanding of. you are too elitist to dig deeper than a google search. is this the only means of finding information you all have? if USA today is more understated than your cheap google search for knowledge than wikipedia within itself is a false not-notable datebase. --WildOrganisms (talk) 01:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable; Post your resume on LinkedIn, not Wikipedia.--Unionhawk Talk 23:32, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Do not Delete it is absurd that all of you are in a sense ganging up on one persons reputation as well as demeaning and essentially denoting the possibility that this person may hold a certain place in relevance for his work in his medium. the USA today link is substantial in the mere fact that it is allowed on the corporations site all-together. stop trying to remove value from someone else name to make yourself feel important. important people do not take Wikipedia seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.138.255 (talk) 02:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Comparing an aspiring artist to a notable part of popular culture serves no purpose. We include articles on the criteria of verifiability and notability, and each articles stands on its own merit. In this case, Swaby was mentioned in a blog (not a reliable source), and then on TrendHunter. The "USA Today" article is no such thing, it is a stub syndication of the TrendHunter entry. One source isn't enough to establish notability. The only other non-social network or blog comment I can find is a listing at . This biog falls under the guideline at WP:CREATIVE. Read that, and you'll see that this article doesn't cut it. Sorry. While we can wish Swaby good luck in his career, we have to wait until he has been recognised further. Fences and windows (talk) 04:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Then you must be pretty unimportant, because you seem to be treating this as a life or death matter. Nosleep  break my slumber 03:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

As nominator, update AfD vote to Speedy Delete under WP:SNOW --mhking (talk) 23:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

its called proper litigation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.138.255 (talk) 07:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete and CLOSE - The only !votes for keep are by SPAs, with WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS type arguments.. Delete and close.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 11:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Struck double !vote--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 11:59, 20 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.