Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mickey Smith (artist)


 * 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 - based on the present state of the article. Let's see if it improves based on the statements of those proposing it should be kept. It needs attention. Tyrenius 23:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Mickey Smith (artist)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable artist. Appears to be vanity article, or otherwise overly praising. Sources are all generic links to gallery web sites and such, with nothing on those links to verify author's claims. All other sources are primary. Only a handful of Google hits aside from her own site(s). Delete. Realkyhick 16:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * This entry was created to describe an artist, much like Alec Soth's wikipedia entry. It states facts much like those found on his entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heatherever (talk • contribs)
 * Comment: "Other stuff exists" is not a valid argument. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Realkyhick 16:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Did a simple google search and it appears there is a lot of information on her.  Plenty of sources could be added to this page.  Sufficiently passes WP:BIO -- su mn ji m  talk with me·changes 16:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Then add the sources and I may reconsider. I'm actually pretty easy to persuade on matters like this. Realkyhick 23:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 15:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 15:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless the sources mentioned above are added, then perhaps a weak keep. The artist's statement should be removed. Freshacconci 16:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * FYI the artist's statement is from the 3rd party source, so it can be referenced from there. It appears no one else has taken interest in this article so I will take the time and source the article tonight -- su mn ji m  talk with me·changes 18:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 16:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, but only if artist atatement is removed, it has no place in a encyclopedia. Callelinea 22:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - could use more external sources, but the subject exists and appears notable enough for inclusion. I agree that the article should be rewritten in a more encyclopaedic tone. Terraxos 23:39, 5 July 2007 (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.