Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fred Fields

{{Delrevafd|date=2010 July 1}}

: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 no consensus. –MuZemike 23:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

=[[Fred Fields]]=

:{{la|Fred Fields}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fred Fields}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{Find sources|Fred Fields}})

Delete. Fails WP:BLP and WP:N, with a distinct lack of non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications. JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 15:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Keep The subject has published illustrations in several books and games which makes him notable. The article is moreover sourced by third-party material and does therefore not fail WP:BLP nor WP:N. De728631 (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete - Notability is not inherited. The only reference given is from Dragon (magazine), which is not independent since it's published by TSR, Inc./Wizards of the Coast (or was, at the time of publication), the guy's employer, thus it cannot be used to establish notability. Coverage by actual independent source is completely lacking.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 22:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep - I started this one back in November, and I'll admit I didn't use any citations at the time (my bad). Fortunately, in March, the article was built up a fair bit and a source was added. Since this was done fairly recently, I am confident that more sources are out there somewhere. BOZ (talk) 23:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

:*Comment WP:NRVE, WP:BURDEN. You have to provide the sources, not just allude to them possibly existing.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 01:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep. Reasonable claims of notability, likely search term, sourcing is sufficiently reliable, especially given the noncontentious nature of the article content. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete per lack of reliable, independent sources. So obscure is this unnotable comic book artist that most of the hits I found were about different Fred Fieldses, most of whom have a better claim to notability than this one. Seriously, check out Google Books if you don't believe me. Reyk YO! 00:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete. No independent sources (the one in the article is from a magazine his artwork appears in). Notability is demonstrated through coverage, which this person does not seem to have garnered. Quantpole (talk) 09:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
  • :I just added one - or at least the hint of one; I'll try to dig up more info on that regarding his appearance in a current exhibit in Chicago. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 13:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

::*Comment - good find, however, since it's just one exhibit with his works amongst many others, it's probably not enough to pass the criteria offered by WP:ARTIST.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Sorry but that just appears to be a flyer for an exhibition. It doesn't really tell us anything about this person. Quantpole (talk) 13:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Delete - as per nom and Quantpole. Codf1977 (talk) 09:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep - Reasonable claims of notability. Hooper (talk) 14:25, 25 June 2010 (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.