Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Kleff (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Main advocate for keeping blocked for UPE. This does not necessarily mean all their comments are rendered null and void, but I have to give them much less weight, and therefore consensus is quite clear. Vanamonde (Talk) 06:38, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Mario Kleff
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Increasingly lacking in confidece that this is a notable article. Fails WP:BIO.  scope_creep Talk  13:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Does seem to have decent coverage, although almost entirely from Real Estate Magazine Thailand. His works have received some recognition such as his Ocean Villas winning the 2012 Thailand Property Award for best Boutique Condo which can be used to satisfy point 4 or WP:ARCHITECT, but I'm not sure about the independence of this coverage. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:39, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * After additional input regarding the sources below, I'm changing my !vote to delete as the sources are not reliable/independent enough to meet GNG. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 22:23, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:40, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - The content including reference links to Mod Dam 1199 R, Thailand Dragon and lifestyle was removed and edited just before the page was suggested for deletion. This seems strategic and should be explored. Claiming that Mario Kleff is not an artist is a false claim. He is mentioned as an artist in newspapers and books. Google Books Meow2021 (talk) 14:44, 9 August 2021 (UTC) — Meow2021 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment The term an artist was removed as producing several folio's from The Book of Kells isn't evidence that he passes WP:NAUTHOR. The award described above is corporate award and is non-notable. I will review the refences later to determine if he notable architect or designer.   scope_creep Talk  15:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't understand. Perhaps there's more to learn about the Wikipedia rules. Thanks for the clarification, however. Meow2021 (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2021 (UTC) Regards

What is your note supposed to mean? Does it mean that my opinion should not be recognized in an open discussion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.204.221.186 (talk) 09:25, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Aside from the long-term history (11 years, to be precise) of promotion (and obvious sockpuppeting at the first AfD), I am not convinced by the sources that this person is notable. The article claims seem to be accompanied by very marginal proof of accomplishment. --- Possibly &#9742; 17:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Sourcing (including the inspirepattaya.com piece linked above) all appears to come from outfits that deal in Native advertising, making it impossible to establish that this is really independent coverage. While 'Real Estate Magazine Thailand' was a print publication, judging from their website it was a free 'delivered around town whether you want it or not' book of ads for real estate listings. - MrOllie (talk) 21:58, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - promotional article and, as per MrOlllie, most of the sources are native advertising, therefore the subject lacks independent coverage. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:16, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete The weight of evidence seems to indicate he fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV.   scope_creep Talk  23:07, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Promotional or non-promotional is a matter of interpretation. I created this article on the development of Pattaya. Mr. Mario Kleff appears and stands out. I found his story remarkable, and still do. However, I can agree that this may not be noteworthy at the international level. Yet there are things noteworthy in his life and work that cannot be described as promotional or non-artistic. I hereby disagree. I did research to better understand feedback as I'm a newbie to Wikipedia and still don't understand all of the regulations. The translation of past newspaper articles clearly shows that he studied art and design, and there have been a number of notable exhibitions including at the Gutenberg Museum Mainz and the Diocesan Museum Trier. Maybe as a journalist I should be questioning myself... delete it if you want, but the process of how certain editors have tried this since I wrote about proves something too... Also, in the first deletion says "low-level designer"... I mean, what kind of statement is that? The man likely created much of Pattaya city, including confirmed inventions in building construction. But some Wikipedia editors have created nothing but emotional statements. Prove to me that contributing to Wikipedia can be a waste of time. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 02:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Do you still have sources on those notable exhibitions? Those would bolster the case for keeping the article. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:39, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Answer I did intensive research while creating all the articles. The most relevant links to this particular article have been used, I have not included unsuitable sources, e.g. Mainz News: Mario Kleff and Urs Düggelin in the Gutenberg Museum Mainz 1993, Ireland and the Book of Kells, not A Masterpiece Of Expressiveness - The artist Mario Kleff copied the Book of in 1997 Kells in the Episcopal Cathedral and Diocesan Museum Trier, which required an installation of Macromedia Flashplayer to view it in the Firefox browser, Chrome would not work. It is also said that he studied art and design and worked as an art director for a company in Munich, which suggests that he is an artist. It seemed that there were years of artistic work between 1993-1997. Tried to make the most of it. In all honesty, I still don't get the discussion about this article. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep To my knowledge, all this information is factually verifiable and non-contentious. If this is considered insufficiently "notable", then thousands of other Wikipedia entries which are far less notable will need to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:fb1:135:fe32:b809:a040:df5f:d8ef (talk) 03:30, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Why do you want to delete Mario Kleff?! This article is about a designer and engineer who lives in Pattaya and seems to be properly prepared. Be sure to keep it. Also, I suggest to bring back the full article to give the reader a better picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.204.221.186 (talk) 05:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - please note that the above two IP accounts have no other edits to date. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:03, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - User:223.204.221.186 just above appears to be within the same dynamic range (Triple T Internet Company Limited) as an earlier Commons IP edit, seemingly ascribed to Meow2021.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 13:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - Controversial figure in the Pattaya area. Loads of native advertising, non-RS sources etc that swamps any Google search. However, if you search hard enough, you can find enough to satisfy GNG from reporting of opposition to his schemes. I've only looked in English language sources, there may be more in Thai sources. To clarify a statement above, the sockpuppetry etc took place 11 years ago, rather than it has been going on continuously for over 11 years (unless there is something I don't know about). --John B123 (talk) 14:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You seem to have a habit of posting comments like these without providing the actual sources, or evidence to the contary. The normal course would be to post WP:THREE reference to prove its notable. Can you do that, please?   scope_creep Talk  14:50, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That seems extremely biased. Your opinion above that he fails he fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV is accepted, but my opinion he does is challenged. That is one of the reasons I try and avoid AfDs. --John B123 (talk) 15:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to be. That is not biased. You have made a statement without evidence. That is the normal process in WP:AFD for more than a decade now. Provide WP:THREE refs to prove the article is notable, and then the Afd can come to a stop, immediately. Saying they're is evidence there, there without showing the evidence is just that, a statement, with no validity.   scope_creep Talk  15:08, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , That's exactly what I can't understand on Wikipedia! Editors should discuss and help each other rather than competing for rankings. I believe the references given are strong enough for this article. I only read from claims that these references are promotional or even paid advertisements in local magazines. Where is the evidence of that? Why is so little discussion about the article and content, the facts written down? This I want to know. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 15:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * a statement, with no validity, no more than your statement above hence my comment. Whilst on the subject of AfD procedures, the nomination of the article is taken as read that the nominator !votes delete, so doesn't add a separate !vote within the discussion. However, I've got far more constructive things to do with my time than argue over this so have struck through my "statement". --John B123 (talk) 15:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, You didn't need to do that. I thought it would be a timesaver. I'll search for three references and do a review of the current refernces.   scope_creep Talk  15:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Vexations (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Some of his projects have been covered by news website The Thaiger. The site falls a bit more on the tabloidish side of the news spectrum, but the coverage isn't quite positive so it's presumably not sponsored and should count as independent. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete This is promotional. I reviewed all the sources ever used in the article. There is some very minimal coverage in independent, reliable sources, but mostly, it's over-the top promotion. International star architect... I don't think so. They have better coverage than this:
 * tearsheet from Paulinus_(Wochenzeitung), note that merits.partners is run by Kleff
 * tearsheet from Lifestyle, a supplement to Pattaya People Weekly (http://pattayapeople.com/)
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * looks like a press release, but source is used in 23 other articles
 * dead link only used in articles about Kleff or related topics (Cellular beam, Wongamat Tower and Mario Kleff)
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * dead link
 * seems OK, isbn 9783790201642
 * PediaPress is definitely not a reliable source
 * dead link
 * two sentences mention Kleff only briefly, but the author refers to him as "the famous architect Mario Kleff."
 * self-published: Source: Mario Kleff
 * half a sentence: "and Mario Kleff – a renowned German architect"
 * tearsheet from ReM, (, formerly realestatemagazinethailand.com I think) refers to him as "international star architect Mario Kleff"
 * Not a published source
 * doesn't mention Kleff, refers to "foreign husband, nationality unconfirmed"
 * provides some coverage, appears independent
 * doesn't mention Kleff, source is 77kaoded, links to * dead link
 * self-published
 * some coverage in the Aachener Zeitung
 * author is a "contributor"
 * doesn't mention Kleff.
 * doesn't mention Kleff.
 * only says: Der Künstler und Designer Mario Kleff kopiert das "Book of Kells". (English: The artist and designer Mario Kleff copies the "Book of Kells".)
 * doesn't mention Kleff.
 * Single sentence: "Der Künstler Mario Kleff hat das Buch als Faksimile kopiert und somit der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht." (English:The artist Mario Kleff has copied the book as a facsimile and thus made it accessible to the public.)
 * youtube is not a reliable source
 * youtube is not a reliable source


 * I accept the difficulties in this article, it was no less difficult to keep track of and get all the facts and information. However, for me, there is no doubt about the validity of Mario Kleff and his work. As mentioned earlier, I am in no way affiliated or related to the subject, but I am a journalist who works in Pattaya and I know what is in town. The story is rather interesting and I've been trying to sort things out. Please do what you are supposed to, but do it without emotion. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 03:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Keep I came across this article and discussion but I know nothing about this man. However, while reading the story and reference links, I would suggest saving them. There seems to be a lot of effort re-establishing the information and links provided. I don't think it harms Wikipedia or overrates this person. To me it doesn't read as an advertisement, maybe a little colorful in the news articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2403:6200:8851:8ce1:edad:17dc:5c05:e9da (talk) — 2403:6200:8851:8ce1:edad:17dc:5c05:e9da (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Editor 223.204.221.186. Another WP:SPA who has never added content to any Wikipedia article.   scope_creep Talk  09:33, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hint! After looking at the history, it appears to be a different editor. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 17:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Note: You should give people easier access to participate !! I found it very difficult to find the comments section. I don't like this fella but he did some great things here in Pattaya. So if my vote counts keep it then — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.47.155.200 (talk • contribs)
 * Editor 1.47.155.200 . Another WP:SPA who has never added content to any Wikipedia article.  scope_creep Talk  11:18, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:Disappointment - After being invited to join the discussion about whether or not to delete / keep / improve the article, I now feel like Editor John B123: better not to waste time and open the arena to those who can decide what to do when and how to do it. There is no real discussion and attention for improvement here, but rather assertions and cherry-picking. Now what about the article... what's the next step? Hello, anyone home? Meow2021 (talk) 17:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Meow2021, the Afd runs for seven days. It might be worth reading WP:AFD and WP:THREAD. Everytime somebody makes a comment, the new entry pops up in their watchlist.   scope_creep Talk  17:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you scope_creep for feedback and info, didn't know. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 19:08, 11 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Note I have restored the comment by, which was massively refactored by Meow2021. Meow2021, that is not OK, do not change the comments of others. you are being quite disruptive here. --- Possibly &#9742; 21:36, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Am I? I haven't changed anything as the editing history proves. I only responded to the suggested information in chronological order. AfD's appear to be difficult. I just saw your feedback on my talk page. Regards, Meow2021 (talk) 03:05, 12 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - After reviewing the article sources, and considering analyses thereof, I am not finding that this person meets WP notability criteria WP:GNG  nor WP:NARCHITECT. The proliferation of SPA's on this AfD, and refactoring of other editors posts is also troubling. It also seems there may be some double !vote errors. Some advise to : please let the AfD process unfold naturally. Netherzone (talk) 00:10, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - Hi everyone, after reading the links on the Wikipedia rules you are referring to, I started to understand why the article I created and tried to defend is weak, especially when it comes to noteworthy links and statements. It seems that regardless of verified or unverified information on a topic in magazines or newspapers, "notable" is being challenged, so is the article. Thank you editors for your participation and feedback on this matter. No insult or attack was meant. Regards, Meow2021 (talk) 03:05, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I have never seen this before, but Mario Kleff has two different promotional biographies devoted to himself at the Wandee Group web site. One and two. This may be relevant for those assessing sources and wondering how much promotion is behind them. --- Possibly &#9742; 06:15, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That first one somewhat resembles a Wikipedia page. including the infobox, over 1000 wikilinks and images already uploaded to commons,and links to contributions by users MarioKleff and Wongsin.Vexations (talk) 14:24, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment A third weblink with some background content can be found here (I saw it months ago).--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 14:31, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe that link should be posted to COIN? Netherzone (talk) 15:24, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment After spending a little more time researching, I found articles about Mario Kleff and his work with the Book of Kells. Exhibitions e.g. Gutenberg Museum confirmed. Search results on pages 52 - 56 Meow2021 (talk) 02:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Genious is a business information site, information in the form of blog, press-releases, whitepapers, research papers put out by companies. They would not be independent. The merits above is content for website. It is not independent either.   scope_creep Talk  10:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The relevant entry seems to be either https://www.genios.de/document?id=TV__1297130085&src=hitlist&offset=550, or https://www.genios.de/document?id=TV__1297110012&src=hitlist&offset=550 which references an 67- or 76-word article in the de:Trierischer Volksfreund, a local newspaper. It's not a link to the article itself, so it's not a citation at all, merely clue that the Volksfreund published an announcement for a "Dia-Vortrag" (a slide lecture) in the local library. Not a great source.Vexations (talk) 11:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Newspapers such as Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Allgemeine Zeitung, Rhein Zeitung , General-Anzeiger, Süddeutsche Zeitung , Paulinus  published articles about Mario Kleff and the Book of Kells, work and exhibitions. I've downloaded and translated some. Meow2021 (talk) 12:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Post up links to the best three per WP:THREE, so they can be examined.    scope_creep Talk  13:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It is not required that sources are in English, nor do they need to be translated, but they do need to be cited in such a way that it is possible for other editors to find the source. Just saying that something was published in the Frankfurter Allgemeine is not sufficient. The name date of publication, title, author are the minimum. A URL is optional, but not required. I would advise against translating a source though, especially if one is not a native or near-native speaker. (Noting that Meow2021 claims to speak English, Thai and Chinese, but doesn't mention German). Vexations 21:53, 16 August 2021. The sig machine is down. Sig added by   scope_creep Talk  21:32, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your advice, but I don't speak German. Meow2021 (talk) 23:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you provide URL links to the articles, so we can examine them. I can read German.   scope_creep Talk  23:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Tried. Links to articles appear to be reserved for paid access.

... The Munich artist Mario Kleff has meticulously traced 14 pages from this unique specimen on parchment following the model in detail. These replicas can be seen together with information boards on the genesis work..., '''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, August 13, 2001, No. 186. p. 62'''

... In 1990, this gave the now 33-year-old painter and designer Mario Kleff, who was fascinated by the Book of Kells, with the idea of tracing the book down to the last detail with the orginal colors and on calf's parchment and thus preserving it for posterity ... In February 1993 Kleff was able to present five finished pages in the Gutenberg Museum Mainz ..., Allgemeine Zeitung, 06/29/00

... A few weeks ago, the artist Mario Kleff was a guest in the Bishop's Cathedral and Diocesan Museum, who made it his business to copy the "Book of Kells". Some of these re-painted pages can be seen in the facsimile exhibition in the Episcopal Cathedral and Diocesan Museum ... Paulinus, No. 42, p. 11

... The German art expert Mario Kleff (born in 1967) has been making a duplicate based on a bet for about ten years Gospels. In the meantime 30 of about 700 pages have been reproduced. 15th his precise works are exhibited in the Calauer Landkirche and can be compared with the originals ... Lausitzer Rundschau, 08/28/2003

... About 1200 years ago three monks wrote and illustrated in Ireland infinite ingenuity on veal parchment the four gospels in Latin language. The Munich artist Mario Kleff left this Handwriting with with original recipes meticulously handcrafted ..., Rhein-Zeitung, 02.03.1999 / LOK

There is more on this subject. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 00:54, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Comment I spent time and research creating the article on Mr. Mario Kleff, helped to keep it. Information above along with other references found on Google Books and Google News  should be viewed as factually verifiable. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 01:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * . but I don't speak German You just wrote: I've downloaded and translated some. Did you mean that you used machine translation? Not necessary. We can do that too, and some of us speak German. Better give the German text. But do provide a proper reference please. Vexations (talk) 01:39, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * To links provided you answered Genious is a business information site, information in the form of blog, press-releases, whitepapers, research papers put out by companies. They would not be independent. Since you speak German, I recommend that you download and read, or translate if you don't . Quote scope_creep The name date of publication, title, author are the minimum. A URL is optional, but not required. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 02:04, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, and before I forget, paywalled sources are also acceptable. Not so great is a reference to the F.A.Z. without a title and author. BTW, the F.A.Z. has a page where it lists its articles from August 13, 2001 at https://www.faz.net/artikel-chronik/nachrichten-2001-august-13/. I don't see anything there about Kleff though. https://fazarchiv.faz.net/fazSearch/index/searchForm?q=%22Mario+Kleff%22&search_in=&timePeriod=timeFilter&timeFilter=&DT_from=&DT_to=&KO%2CSO=&crxdefs=&NN=&CO%2C1E=&CN=&BC=&submitSearch=Suchen&maxHits=&sorting=&toggleFilter=&dosearch=new#hitlist yields some results, but those are in the Rhein-Main-Zeitung (the regional edition), not the F.A.Z. In other words, the citation "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, August 13, 2001, No. 186. p. 62" fails verification, and you admittedly can't read it in the original German, nor do you have access, because it's paywalled. Vexations (talk) 02:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Search more! Quelle: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Zeugnis fruhen Christentums, 13.08.2001, Nr. 186, S. 62
 * Why should I do more work to find a source that you cannot correctly identify? If you already have it, show it to us. Vexations (talk) 12:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if refs exist, it sounds like trivial human interest material. He traced and colored pages from the notable manuscript, notability is not inherited. This is not original work by an artist, it'a a stunt. I can't see how this act of tracing a manuscript could pass the criteria for notability for artists per WP:NARTIST. It sounds like more PR-placement of news-release coverage. Netherzone (talk) 15:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Comment Regardless, the article Mario Kleff contains over 27 reference links as well as new information revealed on this page; Information that they claim is promotional and unverifiable. Keep - unless you can prove incorrect information. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 02:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * you have already !voted once, double !voting is not permitted. I have struck your second K***. Netherzone (talk) 03:16, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: This is clearly heading toward deletion, but as there's some good-faith effort being made to examine the German sources, relisting for another week.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 09:15, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the opportunity. The article is now rewritten and hopefully meets the WP requirements. Please advise how to link German sources... Regards Meow2021 (talk) 08:28, 18 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment - the article is improved to read less promotionally now, but the fundamental issue is whether WP:NBIO is met, and I don't think the sources discussed above are of much benefit in this area. MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:29, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment agree that the article has been significantly improved, but would like opinions on these WP:THREE German sources from a German speaking editor with access to them (last two are behind a paywall). Do they meet WP:GNG?   Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:23, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The first one is a passing mentions, so is non-notable. It is not in-depth.   scope_creep Talk  16:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The second article is a brief mention at 264 words is two small paragraphs, is not in-depth. Mentions the Books of Kells, a single event.   scope_creep Talk  17:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I can't access the middle one?   scope_creep Talk  17:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Middle one is supposed to be the 3rd cited reference (Frankfurter Neue Presse. 25 August 2001) but it looks like it's using the wrong URL since it's identical to the one used in the 2nd reference. Regardless, thanks for your input and I'll be staying with my !vote above. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 17:33, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

The nomination for the deletion claim, which relates to articles that lack in-depth information, is utter nonsense. In view of the evidence, Mr Mario Kleff has undoubtedly been known for years in connection with the Book of Kells. His work was presented in 1993 in the Gutenberg Museum Mainz, in 1997 in the Diocesan Museum Trier and from 1993 to 2000 in numerous other locations. His daughter is Jiang Li Wongsin. Mario Kleff is the director of Wandeegroup, Wandee Real Estate and Wandeegroup Asia with the given Thai name Thiti Teerachin. His wife is Nittaya Wongsin, they are married so it oviously that they both are linked to leopards. The article was fairly rewritten but again edited before the discussion closed. That seems like cherry picking to me; or personally?

Note: The following information that I found on the Wandeegroup website is not used to verify the article but to aid the information in question. It says here Jiang Li Wongsin, daughter of Mario Kleff and Nittaya Wongsin. Kleff was presented at the Trier Museum and worked on the Book of Kells. This is how it reads when you enter the German text and use Google translate into English: "A masterpiece of expressiveness and craftsmanship - the artist and designer copies the Book of Kells. A few weeks ago, the artist who made it his mission to copy the Book of Kells was a guest in the Episcopal Cathedral and Diocesan Museum. Some of the painted pages can also be seen in the facsimile exhibition in the Episcopal Museum. About seven years ago, Mario Kleff started to recreate this work. Born in Boppard, Kleff learned early Christian book illumination with a focus on the manufacture of writing and work implements before he decided to study painting, graphics and design." Regards Meow2021 (talk) 10:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC) 10:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That is just a tiny little bit misleading. Yes, there is a headline that says "Ein Meisterwerk an Aussagekraft und Handwerk“, BUT that is a quote from Kleff about the original, it is not an assessment of Kleff's work. The exact text is "Für mich ist dieses Buch das Meisterwerk an Aussagekraft und Handwerkskunst schlechthin“, unterstreicht der Künstler." (In Enlish: "For me, this book is the quintessential masterpiece of expressiveness and craftsmanship," the artist undescores.) The article is full of nonsense and self-contradictions, BTW. The claim that nobody has managed to make copies of the folios is simply false, see Helen Campbell D'Olier. Kleff claims to be familiar with the technique (Zwar war er mit der Technik der Frühchristlichen Buchmalerei vertraut), but turns out to be new to painting on parchment. Kleff claims that it is impossible erase something on parchment. That's not quite right; see palimpsest for example. He also claims very high pigment prices (Bei einigen Farbmitteln muß man für ein Kilogramm mehrere tausend Mark bezahlen”), but fails to note that one doesn't need kilograms of the stuff. Yes, Lapis Lazuli isn't exactly cheap, but one typically buys it by the ounce, for somewhere around $50. 50 grams of Malachite will set you back $70. Also note that the source, Paulinus, is a publication of the Bisdom of Trier, that also operates the Bischöfliches Dom- und Diözesanmuseum where the facsimiles were exhibited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vexations (talk • contribs)


 * Comment To the publisher without a name. That is interesting. How can this 2018 article Helen Campbell D'Olier be without reference links on Wikipedia? Regards Meow2021 (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Huh? It's got four, two of which are independent book references. - MrOllie (talk) 13:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Surely. I mean all of the text with no links... every line I've created is commented. There is also a reference to an independent book. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 13:56, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Notability is about quality of sources, not just quantity. - MrOllie (talk) 14:00, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

''Meow is a professional business woman with excellent relationships with the authorities and the government. And our project THE TOUCH does really break new ground in terms of design, value and customer satisfaction and takes the real estate industry to a new level.”''. So with the username Meow2021, your Mario Kleff's wife with a clear WP:COI. I'll need to post this up to the coin noticeboard.  scope_creep Talk  11:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Commenting on the new references The first ref is a PR piece, it is a complete PUFF piece article on Kleff's daughter and is very low-quality as a source. It is not independent. Also in the section Excellent Relationships it states: Excellent relationships
 * Did you even read? The following information that I found on the Wandeegroup website is not used to verify the article. Who please, Kleff's wife ??? Regards Meow2021 (talk) 12:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The 2nd re f from the Paulinus-Blatt, a Catholic religious magazine covers aspects of the work done by Kleff on the 17 folios of the Book of Kells. It covers the work he did,and is more in-depth. It is probably good to prove he worked on the Book.   scope_creep Talk  11:52, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps you should discuss this with the author of the article. Not only do you seem unsatisfied with links to information provided, you are questioning their content. However, I've looked a little more. Lapis Lazuli pigment 1kg 20.262,73 €* Meow2021 (talk) 14:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a funny example. Kremer makes beautiful pigments, but this particular version you quote (did you just pick the most expensive one?) is created by a process that hadn't been invented when the Book of Kells was created. And no, I don't have to take this up with the author of the article. If I can show that a source is full of errors and inconsistencies and is used to make a claim that it doesn't support, then we don't make that claim. Reliability of sources is contextual. We can use Paulinus for some claims, but not others. In this case, it cannot be used to say that "by 1997 had copied around 30 pages on parchment using equipment and pigment he manufactured himself for authenticity." He uses tools that are not "authentic". Kleff uses "eine spezielle Stahlfeder, die feinste, dies im Fachhandel gibt", A Stahlfeder is a steep dip pen, a 19th century invention. He also didn't make his own pigments, but bought those from a store, and he didn't make his own parchment, because he bought that from a store too. He did apparently prepare his own binders, which is a common practice, I do that too when I prepare a the gesso and bole for a water-gilded frame. It is nothing especially notable, just cooking glue (frequently from parchment BTW). What we can use Paulinus as a source for is to say that Kleff, a graphic designer, took up reproducing the Book of Kells as a hobby around 1990, and by 1997 had created copies of fifteen folios. Several of those copies were included in the 1997 exhibition Glanz des Mittelalters: Kostbare Faksimile aus Trierer Bibliotheken in the Bischöfliches Dom- und Diözesanmuseum. As another aside, if people are interested in a comparison between a copy and the original, these links https://wandeegroup.com/pdf/mario-kleff-book-of-kells.pdf (the fact that it was printed on newsprint doesn't help, but one can still see what he did there) with https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/KellsFol032vChristEnthroned.jpg (not a good photo) or https://digitalcollections.tcd.ie/concern/folios/n296wz391?locale=en (very high quality photo). And lastly, for those of you who are curious to know if one really needs a kilogram of Lapis Lazuli at a cost of €20.262,73  to reproduce the Book of Kells, I recommend The quick answer to that is the same as whether any this makes Kleff a suitable encyclopedic subject: Hell, no.   Vexations (talk) 00:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Vexations Why this comment? I haven't written any of the articles found on the internet, I created the article on Kleff but tried to review the information because I don't like how hard some editors try to delete every version of it. I also checked your feedback on pigment prices and found that you weren't entirely right about it. For me there is factual information about Kleff's architectural designs as well as about his work on the Book of Kells. Then you deleted the names of his children? Now you explain to me what the Book of Kells is about? Weird. Meow2021 (talk) 03:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Stop making false claims about what I wrote. Last warning. Our next stop is WP:AN/I. Vexations (talk) 20:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Do it, I have nothing to hide. Article history shows. By the way... What was the first warning? Meow2021 (talk) 01:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Aww, c'mon you two... Do things really have to get uncivil and degraded to the level of finger-pointing and bickering? :-(  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
 * First warning was https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Meow2021&type=revision&diff=1038246050&oldid=1038027761&diffmode=source Vexations (talk) 02:05, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

To your information: An editor on this talk page has included poorly sourced information in the article. Got it removed. Interesting is that the same editor voted Delete - promotional article and, as per MrOlllie, most of the sources are native advertising, therefore the subject lacks independent coverage.. Why? Regards Meow2021 (talk) 12:17, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * See WP:ABOUTSELF, self published sources may be used for information about themselves. But do note that such sourcing cannot be used to establish notability. Please do keep this page focused on discussions about notability. If you have general questions about Wikipedia editing you should take them up on the article talk page or perhaps at WP:TEAHOUSE. - MrOllie (talk) 12:24, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi MrOllie This is a discussion page about the article and there is more to it than just notability. So I'm curious why this editing happened. Regards Meow2021 (talk) 12:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , your description of "Got it removed" implies that someone else removed it, whereas actually you removed it yourself. MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:43, 21 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete I delayed !voting until I had looked at other sites - all of which are highly-promotional (self-promotional, self-congratulatory), even using similar intro lines as appear on WP. Wikipedia is therefore being used in the same promotional way; this is just one article of many associated with Kleff, Kleff's business and/or the area in which it operates. Two images at Commons (one, two) are also visible at (Kleff's) Instagram landing page (Google as direct link is volatile). I don't have access so unaware if there's any licensing. The background is a commercial construction business (endeavouring to recover after COVID) operating in a developing holiday area (Pattaya/Chonburi). The unblock-argument gives an angle on lack of notability at User talk:Meow2021#August 2021 "... there is little to no information in the press in the Chonuri area, so I sourced as best as I could.", ([SIC], should be Chonburi) shown as a diff as there are two User Talk Headings named "August 2021". --Rocknrollmancer (talk) 18:03, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment for closer. has been blocked indefinitely for undisclosed COI/paid editing. They're the only registered account with a k**p vote and have been the only one advancing an argument against deletion for this article. All the other k**p votes have been SPAs just to vote on this AfD. I think a consensus for d*lete is clear at this point. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 20:38, 22 August 2021 (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.