Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/David Patchen

=Closing Administrator's rationale=
 * Note: If you choose to add any follow-on comments or wish to make corrections to any of this rationale, please do so in your own level 1 section below this one. Do NOT edit my comments or add your comments intermingled with mine in this top section.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 05:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Raw count analysis

 * AFD is not a vote, this anaylsis is provided only as a counter-argument that the 'tally' was evenly split at 5-5.

Delete

 * 1) User:Chasingsol (13 edits)
 * 2) User:ChildofMidnight
 * 3) User:LinguistAtLarge
 * 4) User:Morbidthoughts
 * 5) User:Narson

Keep

 * 1) User:Davidpatchen (2 edits) 
 * 2) User:Jubileeclipman (2 edits)
 * 3) User:Jmundo (2 edits)
 * 4) User:Franciscrot
 * 5) User:Marine 69-71
 * 6) User:Inclusionist

Non-participatory

 * 1) User:SineBot (2 edits) SIGNING
 * 2) User:Sandstein RELIST
 * 3) User:Gene93k DELSORT
 * 4) User:Erwin85Bot DELSORT

Rough consensus

 * Delete arguments presented:
 * Advertisement in nature; page has spammy links WP:SPAM
 * Article author/contributor is subject WP:COI
 * No coverage in reliable sources; not notable WP:N, WP:RS
 * Few ghits
 * Some coverage, trivial, not extensive
 * Fails WP:CREATIVE based on provided sources
 * Article quality is low and is not regularly improved


 * Keep arguments presented:
 * Topic notability defined by gallery presence and participation prominent shows
 * Topic not covered well on the internet
 * Front page coverage in Newspaper
 * No editor COI influence on article neutrality WP:NPOV
 * Passes criteria of WP:CREATIVE: Presence in prestigious art galleries, exhibitions and awards
 * Article quality not a valid deletion argument
 * There is NO DEADLINE


 * Rationale
 * On assessing these arguments, I have to take into account the consensus at WP:CREATIVE, which was developed especially for articles like this one, whose topic may not be covered as well as more pop-culture topics on the internet. This guideline tells us to regard a creative professional as notable if any of the following are true:
 * The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors.
 * The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.


 * The person's work either
 * has become a significant monument
 * has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition
 * has won significant critical attention
 * is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums
 * or had works in many significant libraries


 * The sources provided in this discussion and in the article support that this article's subject meets the criteria, as was opined by more than half of the participants in the discussion.


 * Decision was to Keep the article.