Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trevor Brown


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:39, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Trevor Brown

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

There is no sourcing here, and I'm stuggling to see how this is verifiable or notable. Mind you, given that he's an artist in "paraphilias, such as pedophilia, BDSM, and other fetish themes" I don't really want to try too hard. I'm sure someone else will investigate this. Scott Mac (Doc) 16:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep — He is notable in certain subcultures and it's arguable that he first made notable the genre that Mark Ryden now seems to dominate (though this is totally speculation without citation). I agree the article needs some serious love and attention. Quaeler (talk) 17:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Given that your argument is based on "it's arguable" and "this is speculation", I'm less than convinced. We need third-party reliable attestation of some importance if we are to keep this. Can you provide any?--Scott Mac (Doc) 17:56, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't want to read too much bias into the way you've written your paragraph ('I don't see how he's notable. obviously since his material is of a nature that would offend me, i don't want to determine this anyway'), but even a quick spin through Google returns a spate of links. Were you to want something specific, a few minutes using Google turned up his shared influences with Gottfried Helnwein, a notable musician being influenced by him, his album art work and some interviews with him (1, 2, and all the ones pre-2006 which he links on his website). A couple extra minutes at Amazon or EBay shows the absurdly high price people pay just for his released book runs. &hellip; Quaeler (talk) 23:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  —94.196.163.252 (talk) 10:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of the couple of interviews linked above. A so-called controversial artist who has excited very little controversy, but just about notable enough for WP.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 14:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Symbol keep vote.svg|15px]] Keep — Needs some better sourcing (NB: anything with 'wordpress' in the URL isn't reliable), but seems to (barely) pass WP:N. roux    16:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Has he had art shown in a museum or gallery which has been reviewed critically? Has it been reviewed on the basis of its artistic merits or demerits? I don't think so. We don't see critical review; we don't see his art being taken seriously -- as art. We see notice taken of imagery that represents areas of inquiry that is of interest to a group of people, but we don't see notice taken of the imagery as art. On the basis of the absence of Trevor Brown being notable as an artist I think the article should be deleted. Bus stop (talk) 02:36, 30 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.