Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Horne


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 03:26, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Stephen Horne

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Appears to be a non-notable writer. References are to his own works only. Sitush (talk) 11:07, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I've tidied the article a bit and added a first reference to a 3rd party publication. Leaving it open whether this is sufficient to meet WP:ARTIST criteria though. AllyD (talk) 11:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  —AllyD (talk) 11:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Delete - An Article on En:wikipedia should be capable of at least one English source to demonstrate notability to an English spealing user. Mark  Dask  02:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. According to this he's had at least three solo exhibitions. Pburka (talk) 19:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - aren't such exhibitions usually for the purpose of sales? My French isn't great, sorry. I'm fluent in gibberish and nothing else. - Sitush (talk) 19:26, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That depends. The McGill University School of Architecture Gallery is a university run gallery, so it's definitely not commercial. La Chambre Blanche is a co-operative; it's not commercial, either. I can't find much info about the third gallery, the OO Gallery in Halifax. Exhibition at the first two galleries is almost certainly by invitation, and having a public gallery dedicate space to an individual exhibition is a strong indication of notability for an artist. Pburka (talk) 19:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it is not my intention to be obstructive, I'm merely ignorant. Why is a co-op unlikely to be commercial? Here in the UK there are plenty that are just that - they need to live somehow. - Sitush (talk) 20:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I made that determination based on their website, which I linked to. Their primary focus appears to be on education and their internship program. There's no evidence that they operate a commercial gallery at all. Pburka (talk) 22:01, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I looked at the link and, like I said, I'm useless with French. This is going to be an interesting AfD - I'm sort of half-and-half now. - Sitush (talk) 00:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Update: I looked at something and it was in French. Not your link. I'll start over. - Sitush (talk) 00:08, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * oops I should acknowledge AllyD's good source - in English - but is it immediately accessible? For the average reader is it enough to assume AllyD's good faith - one reference in a book is not in itself notability - how notable is the book? Mark  Dask  20:44, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I got it from a Google Books search: page link. Like I said above, I'm not advancing an opinion on whether it is sufficient to establish notability. AllyD (talk) 08:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:13, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete The bibliography on that link given above amounts to 2 reviews in 1996 from small mags, which isn't really enough. Johnbod (talk) 02:18, 22 March 2011 (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.