Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Flemming (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 keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:15, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Peter Flemming (artist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable artist. Does not pass GNG. Maybeparaphrased (talk) 01:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Weak keep this is a tough one notability-wise, as I have had trouble finding sources. If I come up with some I'll add them. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 01:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 07:38, 6 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep References from New York Times and Vice magazine do support claim for notability. I tend toward keepipng, unless convinced otherwise. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Significant coverage in Canadian Art and nontrivial (albeit briefer) coverage in the NYT seems to meet the "multiple in-depth reliable sources" test of WP:GNG, and both also show that his notability is more than purely local. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Changing to Keep. Since the AfD nomination, I've added refs for Macleans (republished in the Canadian Encyclopedia) and non-trivial reviews in ETC magazine and the respected newspaper Le Devoir. I think it makes it now. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 18:41, 12 July 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.