Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Portnoy


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 04:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Michael_Portnoy
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This subject is not notable enough to have his own wikipedia article. His only claim to "notability" is he once invaded a Bob Dylan performance. This does not make him notable. The majority of Wikipedia users would never have heard of this man. Article says he has history as a comedian and is now a performance artist, but there are many non-famous comedians and performance artists in the world who do not have their own Wikipedia articles. This article was clearly made by Portnoy or a friend for self-indulgent or promotional purposes. Not notable. Brianzamfel (talk) 05:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: Tried to repair this AfD on behalf of Brianzamfel. Someone check it is okay now? --Pgallert (talk) 09:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. If he's sufficiently notable to get articles written about him and his work in the New York Times (see also this), he's notable enough for an article here. Plenty of coverage also of his 'Soy Bomb' performance and subsequent events:, , . See also: Performing Arts Journal, Metropolis M, Martos Gallery, , Art in America, Sundance festival.--Michig (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Plenty of sources, already listed in the article.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 21:33, 5 June 2010 (UTC)




 * Keep Written up in multiple reliable sources from 1992 through 2010 show this individual as meeting WP:GNG. And with respects, I seriously doubt the nominator's assertion that the article "was clearly made by Portnoy or a friend", as its author, User:Luvcraft, has been contributing to Wikipedia since 2004. No matter who wrote the article, it now belongs to Wikipedia, and the subject meets guidelines for inclusion.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Multiple credible sources. Enough to keep Sargentprivate (talk) 04:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I haven't made any investigations into notability, but I would point out that the nominator's statement that "the majority of Wikipedia users would never have heard of this man" sounds more like a reason for keeping than for deletion, as the whole point of an encyclopedia is expand the knowledge of its readers. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability established. Evalpor (talk) 14:09, 7 June 2010 (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.