Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Diggle


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Philip Diggle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article filled with unverifiable, suspect and seemingly innaccurate claims - for example he did not win the John Moores Painting Prize 2010 (he was only a runner up runner up). Sionk (talk) 00:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - since nominating this article I've found a London news source which described Diggle's career since the 1970's. I've also sourced the claims about the John Moores Prize. It's questionable whether this is enough to meet WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST, so I'll let others decide. Sionk (talk) 01:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 02:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 02:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 02:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete -- A NN school art teacher. I note that nthe Moores prize article only lists winners, most of whom hav articles.  I would want to see that article expanded to include runners up before I wanted to treat that as evidcne of notability.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is mostly focused on the person's career in which I would say WP:ACADEMIC is not met. In regards to artist, I would say this article was rightly so no CSD, but being a runner up nor receiving a wide range of coverage suggests this person does not meet WP:ARTIST either. At such a time, delete is the strongest argument unless more coverage could be found beyond the 2nd place award. Mkdw talk 21:17, 26 January 2013 (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.