Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prudence Murphy


 * 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. BJ Talk 09:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Prudence Murphy

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails notability. This is a non-notable photographer who has been shortlisted for an award and has exhibited at non-notable galleries. Jenafalt (talk) 13:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions.   Jenafalt (talk) 13:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep if it can be watched and defended from self-promotion and stuff (as there is at least one COI editor in the edit history). I don't know about which art galleries are notable and stuff, but I do think this reference (currently included as an EL, not inline citations) should help, as it's from Syndney Morning Herald, which AFAIK is a major newspaper.  I know WP:CREATIVE doesn't list that as a criterion, but to be honest (full disclosure here) WP:CREATIVE is a guideline that I believe is too strict. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 14:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nominator. RP459 (talk) 14:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, non-trivial coverage in the Sydney Morning Herald, a major Australian newspaper, as well as independent coverage from Art Monthly means that this article meets the WP:GNG, in my view. Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:54, 21 March 2009 (UTC).
 * Comment The 'coverage' in Art Monthly does not actually comment on her art - just uses it to illustrate a page. The Galleries that she has exhibited in are all minor galleries. She may be heading for notability, but she is not notable as the article or her career currently stands. I tried to clean up the article and find references to her notability, but when I couldn't I listed it for deletion. Jenafalt (talk) 07:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply, I still feel that the SMH coverage, the fact that her art was picked for the illustration, and the sundry awards that she has received all add up to notability. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:54, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - the general notability guidelines should not be a carte blanche to include everything that objectively satisfies them. A single exhibition covered by a single newspaper article (and another source in which a single photograph was included without commentary in an art magazine) is a pretty flimsy basis for notability. IMO, fails WP:CREATIVE.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 03:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete ... for now. This is a close call and I am basing this on the fact that she did not win the award and because the coverage in Art Monthly is just shy of sufficient to demonstrate her notability per our standards. This is so absolutely close that one more magazine mention for one of her showings could get her over the top and we should re-create. This may be a rare case where a "no consensus" might be the best choice. JRP (talk) 01:09, 23 March 2009 (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.