Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clint Wright

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-22 10:02Z

[edit] Clint Wright

Clint Wright (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No citations; no references; no sources; not notable Bus stop 22:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Delete: No citations, references, sources. No notability established.

• Delete per nom. Freshacconci 18:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
• "Wright destroyed many of his own paintings himself." He probably shouldn't have done that if we had wanted to attain notability. "Only three known paintings are attributed to him" and he's dead, so he's not going to be putting out any more work. Unless you're Leonardo, three paintings ain't gonna make it. Although the fact that one of them is at the Foundation E.G. Bührle, if true, indicates that he must have been hella painter. Who knows? If "Wright gained a popular... following in Eastern Europe in the 1980s" is true, then maybe he should have an article. But no references are given, so... Herostratus 02:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 20:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Quarl ^(talk) 22:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. He is not on the list of artists represented at the Foundation E.G. Bührle, which calls into question his best claim to notability. [1] The article about the artistic movement he supposedly started was deleted a few days ago for lack of references (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nouveau Classical Evolution). With no relevant Google hits I can find and no references, he is basically unverifiable and thus should not have an article. --Metropolitan90 00:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:V Alf photoman 00:15, 19 February 2007 (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.