Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maryam Hashemi (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 no consensus. This results in the article being kept by default.  Sandstein  06:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Maryam Hashemi
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Biography of an artist. This article was previously deleted at AfD, and this recreation was speedily deleted as promotional. Discussion at Deletion review/Log/2015 December 10 determined that it should be listed here, presumably because of promotionalism and notability concerns. This is a procedural nomination, I am neutral.  Sandstein  10:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as per previous AfD (which closed as Delete). The article was re-created by the subject, who was aware of the previous deletion debate. This is a promotional autobiography of no compelling notability. Guy (Help!) 10:56, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk) 11:05, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk) 11:05, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep There are enough sources to pass GNG. If we are worried about autobiography, we should remove any text without citation. The editor of the article should be brought up to speed on wiki process if they don't know the ropes, but that's getting outside the scope of AfD. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 13:18, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. The fact that a different version of the article was deleted more than eight years ago has absolutely zero relevance to this discussion. Subsequent BBC TV coverage, multiple exhibitions, and other sources provided show that the subject satisfies the GNG and relevant SNG. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 14:20, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It is relevant, in that the subject edited that article, was aware of its deletion, and re-created it herself. She is also responsible for most edits and pretty much all substantive content. Which is why it reads like a PR bio, I guess. Guy (Help!) 20:13, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete No assertion of notability. Exhibitions not in significant venues, one tv interview doesn't make you notable. Johnbod (talk) 19:07, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Not all articles with autobiographical material are automatically cases for deletion. While the current sources do not seem all that impressive, there are no particularly promotional concerns here. There are no claims of extraordinary talent or press attention, just a matter-of-fact description of her style. The main concern is notability, as there seem to be no printed sources. The search term "Maryam Hashemi" gets about 28,100 results on a google search, and some of them are about other people with the same name. Does anyone have any idea about some reliable sources on British artists from the 21st century? Dimadick (talk) 22:10, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete for lack of significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources as in required by both the general notability guideline and WP:BLPNOTE. No basis for a claim under WP:ARTIST, in fact no claim of notability is stated in the lead or in the article. "Maryam Hashemi" is apparently a common name with news stories about the wushu athlete, volleyball coach, and professor of food biotechnology, but not about this artist. Otherwise she gets passing or directory mention even in non-independent sources such as Edinburgh Iranian Festival (archived) and Hackney Wicked Art Festival (2012). (These are not from the article where the citations to these two are, respectively, a deadlink and an updated version that does not mention her.) Simply being on a television show (BBC-2) about the artistic process does not constitute significant coverage. --Bejnar (talk) 23:42, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: Adequate indicia of notability; enough sources to meet GNG.  Sometimes for these people originally from the third world, and especially women, they can be quite significant in their field.  The BBC coverage is actually pretty extensive.  The UNHCR has followed her work, and this list of her exhibitions seems to establish notability as well.  Montanabw (talk)  04:36, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:46, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as there appears to be insufficient coverage of this individual. --Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 08:06, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, User:Montanabw has it right. Pandeist (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment The BLP subject sought advice here . Legacypac (talk) 10:25, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - per sources which provides notability. per WP:GNG.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per the significant coverage of Maryam Hashemi hereWebCite in the BBC and hereWebCite in Payvand Iran News, and 's arguments for retention. Cunard (talk) 05:57, 4 January 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.