Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Numerical rows


 * 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.  Sandstein  06:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Numerical rows

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

It's very description as a work-in-progress pretty much sums up the issues here. There is no evident notability here per WP:NOTE/WP:GNG. There is no article on the artist himself and it appears to be an attempt to establish notability for his project through Wikipedia. There are no apparent independent sources for this. Google searches for the artist and the work turn up nothing independent of the artist. No judgment on the work itself; it's simply WP:TOOSOON  freshacconci  talk talk  15:10, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  freshacconci  talk talk  15:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per above. There's absolutely nothing to show that this art installation is ultimately notable and it doesn't help that the only sources out there are all primary and that there's a COI going on here. (Since the original editor's name and the artist's name are the same.)Tokyogirl79 (talk) 15:35, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete I found no WP:RS evidence to indicate that this project is notable. That said, it is always possible that some such evidence exists under another language. Happy to revise view if suitably robust references can be located. AllyD (talk) 21:49, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete There are no WP:RS given to establish the subject's notability. The WP:COI issue is a problem...but the real problem is the absence of notability and independent--or any verifiable--sources. --Artene50 (talk) 09:10, 1 July 2012 (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.