Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Napier Kennedy

:{{la|Charles Napier Kennedy}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Charles_Napier_Kennedy Stats])

:({{Find sources|Charles Napier Kennedy}})

Doesn't seem to be much more than a locally-known artist from 100 years ago. In addition, this article is way too short, and can't be of suitable length without getting COPYVIO from one of the two "sources", neither of which appear to be reliable. Google Scholar only turns up two passing mentions. pbp 13:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

• Keep. Looks notable enough to me. I added the following sourced sentence to the article: He was elected to the Royal Institute of Oil Painters in 1883 and became an Associate of the Royal Hibernian Academy in 1896. --Orlady (talk) 17:09, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

::"Looks notable enough to me" sounds mighty subjective. There is only one source in the article, and it doesn't appear to be reliable. Also, the more you add from said source, the closer this article is to being a copyvio of said source pbp 18:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

:::My "looks notable enough" comment related to the two professional affiliations, which I believe help satisfy WP:BIO. As for that Cornwall Artists website, it has a reputable list of sponsors and it conducts a verification process before it publishes anything: [http://cornwallartists.org/] and [http://cornwallartists.org/cornwall-artists/cornwall-artists-who-we-are-what-we-do]. That looks like a WP:RS. (I didn't even look at the other external link that the article lists.) As for the use of the information from the source, using information from a source is not a violation of copyright. Copyright violation comes in when the Wikipedia article copies the wording and/or structure of a source. --Orlady (talk) 18:43, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - Fairly clearly a figure of some significance in art history. [http://www.artmagick.com/pictures/artist.aspx?artist=charles-napier-kennedy HERE'S A BIO] and [http://www.artnet.com/artists/charles+napier-kennedy/past-auction-results HERE'S A SET OF AUCTION PRICE RESULTS OF THIS ARTIST, COLLECTED BY NAME] and HERE'S AN ACADEMIC PAPER ON HIM] (WHOOPS, wrong guy!) and [http://www.libraryireland.com/irishartists/charles-napier-kennedy.php HERE'S A BIO FROM A DICTIONARY OF IRISH ARTISTS] and that's just page one of a simple Google search!!! Worst AfD nomination of the month, it would seem: see WP:BEFORE. Carrite (talk) 19:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

:::Um, BEFORE isn't and never will be mandatory. Also, it was satisfied with the Google Scholar search. pbp 21:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

:::: True enough, but taking 30 seconds to run a simple Google search is an excellent way of heading off bad nominations like this one. Carrite (talk) 21:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

• Keep{{spaced ndash}} This person meets WP:BASIC and WP:GNG:

:* [http://www.libraryireland.com/irishartists/charles-napier-kennedy.php Library Ireland] entry

:* [http://www.londonderrysentinel.co.uk/news/local/portraits-need-restoration-1-2101146 Londonderry Sentinel] article

:* There's also this [http://cornwallartists.org/cornwall-artists/charles-napier-kennedy Cornwall Artists] entry, the reliability of which may be uncertain.

::{{mdash}}Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. 14:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 14:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2012 (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.