Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahim Blak


 * 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. Despite some concerns, consensus is keep and clean-up. TravellingCari 04:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Rahim Blak

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

Appears to be more of a curriculum vitae and portfolio than an encyclopedia article, and little in the way of notability assertions. &mdash; Coren (talk) 23:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete (Changed vote below.) Ok, I get the bit about biography as art and art as biography. But anything remotely resembling "Portrait of the young artist as a hoax" has got to have ironclad references for established notability or it has got to go. ~ Ningauble (talk) 02:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO. Also note creator of article has no edits on any other subject. Basement12 (T.C) 04:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - article is in dreadful but a Google News search for his name turns up non-English coverage. I can't read whatever language it's in but it would seem sources exist to improve the article -- Whpq (talk) 15:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Since the article asserts that the identity of the artist is obscured or disputed, I think we have to raise the bar for verifiability in this biography. When an artist chooses notoriety over notability, it puts us in a quandry.~ Ningauble (talk) 01:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Verifiability obviously is a concern since goofing with his identity is one of his performance schtiks. But it can be overcome with judicious phrasing to note this if notability is established. -- Whpq (talk) 03:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. The very first ghit shows pretty clear notability, and it's even in English, and Google News finds 14 articles in Gazeta Wyborcza (one of Polands most respected newspapers) most of which seem to be substantially about the subject (I do read Polish). Phil Bridger (talk) 21:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * comment - That reference looks really good. I bet an editor could do a complete rewrite of the article with a reference like that? ;-) fr33kman (talk) 03:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete unless cleaned up, and delete the photos too. Stifle (talk) 09:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - And add a big or  tag to it. Needs serious reworking but the subject is notable. Seems it is just the Polish article translated. fr33kman (talk) 03:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Jerry   delusional ¤ kangaroo 01:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Changing my vote. Notability and verifiability have been satisfied. But someone please trim the gallery. He cannot possibly merit more gallery space than Leonardo da Vinci! ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - The person is obviously notable, even though the article obviously requires a lot of overhaul. The article should not be deleted, but a lot of the material should be reformatted or removed. Neelix (talk) 23:32, 6 September 2008 (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.