Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rene Capone


 * 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. Tyrenius 17:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Rene Capone

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This looks like a non-notable, although not to say unremarkable young artist. Nominating for delete, with regrets. Ambition and talent are not eneough to be included in this encyclopedia. &mdash; Gaff ταλκ 00:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I found this: http://www.renecapone.com/biography.htm. Looks like there may well be enough writtent about this artist to warrant inclusion.  I will retract my nom if others agree?  &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 00:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's not a valid reliable source, but http://www.sfbaytimes.com/?sec=article&article_id=7053 and http://www.sfbaytimes.com/?sec=article&article_id=6839 may be notable enough.  Corvus cornix  talk  00:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: Notable; add the above sources to the article. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 02:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Even with the new refs, not notable yet. Johnbod (talk) 02:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. Two mentions in a weekly paper are not enough.  freshacconci  speak to me  03:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, per above. Modernist (talk) 03:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. These sources aren't enough yet, but a google search suggests that the artist is gaining popularity within the gay community, and may be reconsidered in the future. JNW (talk) 03:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. -RiverHockey (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The artist is just starting out - the SF Bay Times references don't amount to notability. Maybe sometime soon.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2007 (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.