Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Starr (artist) (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 keep. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other recommendations for deletion. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Matt Starr (artist)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Resubmit after it was a soft delete and challenged. Clearly fails WP:ARTIST. The reference links are weak in terms of even claiming to establish notability. Many go to articles about some other topic, with a quote made by this artist sometimes about somebody elses work. This is not notability. The most perplexing reference link is one to "Over-the-top Super Bowl deals", which somehow vaguely seems to be something from the artists resume? &mdash; Gaff ταλκ 22:16, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔   00:13, 4 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep on the basis that, for good or ill, new media artists seems to attract the ear of, erm, new media. Living in New York probably helps. There are a number of online media magazines that have written about, or interviewed him (including one 2 days ago). The article certainly needs clean-up and is still weak on sources but squaks over WP:GNG criteria in my view. Sionk (talk) 20:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: I would think that a new media artist would have more, rather than less, apparent coverage on the internet.  To those of us who can remember a time when there was no internet, itis still thought of as new media. &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 16:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep, hence my 'weak' keep. There is a fair amount of credible news sources about him, but they are not at all major, and I wouldn't argue if someone else erred towards 'weak delete'. I obviously got out of bed on the good side on 2 Nov ;) Sionk (talk) 17:03, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The admin who did the soft delete for the last AfD nomination apparently was on the side that it should be deleted. I'm still not clear how it meets WP:Artist.  Hopefully another editor can comment before this gets closed as "no consensus?"  &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 23:00, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:ARTIST is an alternative to the 'route one' WP:GNG, i.e. "A person who fails to meet these additional criteria may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notability." If he meets WP:GNG he doesn't also have to meet WP:ARTIST. Sionk (talk) 23:23, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Matt Starr meets the WP:GNG for a notable person, the one statement with an incorrect citation has been updated, and his page has been updated with his most recent project which was widely covered by notable art press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.254.13.131 (talk) 20:35, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Withdrawn by NOM &mdash; Gaff ταλκ 22:44, 7 November 2014 (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.