Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leesa Streifler


 * 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 significant claims to support notability in discussion, including demonstration of importance in permenant collection Sadads (talk) 17:15, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Leesa Streifler

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seemingly NN WP:CREATIVE professional who also fails WP:GNG Toddst1 (talk) 00:24, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Another resume, courtesy of today's meetup . 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  03:46, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  03:46, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  03:46, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. Having her works as part and also exhibited in Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography and National Gallery of Canada she easily passes WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG. The article may be badly formatted and just at the beginning, but no reason to delete it. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:59, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The article says her work has been exhibited there - it doesn't say any of it is a part of its permanent collection.   Toddst1 (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep per Arthistorian1977. Several works in the National Gallery of Canada. But the unsourced resume listing of exhibitions needs to go. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 12:23, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is an advert for a self-published book. Deb (talk) 12:43, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Deb Why do you think so? She had exhibition in many public galleries and at least two museums. She has her works included in the most important Canada public collection. The tone of article is neutral. How did you decide it's an advert? Arthistorian1977 (talk) 15:26, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I feel it reads like a CV. The references are limited and the mention of the self-published book - though at least it admits to being self-published - suggest a conflict of interest. I accept that it's not clear-cut. Deb (talk) 18:49, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep per WP:NARTIST 4(d) Artists whose works are in the collection of the National Gallery of Canada are notable by definition, especially when those works are purchases by the gallery, not gifts. The NGoC isn't just any museum. Mduvekot (talk) 18:18, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The article says her work has been exhibited there - it doesn't say any of it is a part of its permanent collection.   Toddst1 (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It does, since this diff Mduvekot (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment, it appears that her work is included in the permanent collection: . , I've removed more of the unsourced chaff, and dispensed with the resume format in favor of prose. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 19:07, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete The curent edits indicate a question of WP:CIR. This article should most definitely be deleted as failing WP:ARTN, Wp:ARTIST, and WP:NBIO. 09:52, 9 March 2016 (UTC)09:52, 9 March 2016 (UTC)09:52, 9 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.230.65.134 (talk)
 * Specifically, how does it fail WP:ARTN? Sources do exist. How does it fail WP:ARTIST? The artist's work is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. I find the reference to WP:CIR puzzling. What, specifically, demonstrates incompetence? Mduvekot (talk) 20:52, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Obviously notable. A search for Leesa Streifler in Google news turns up three items over the past couple of months.--Ipigott (talk) 08:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Clearly meets WP:NARTIST. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 12:14, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Based on the sources appears to be a well-established artist. Gamaliel  ( talk ) 15:34, 12 March 2016 (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.