Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph (artist)

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. - Mailer Diablo 07:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph (artist)

Joseph (artist) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No WP:RS, so fails WP:BIO. Google search turns up nothing, probable WP:HOAX. Leuko 02:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – Alf^Photoman 13:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• I live in New York City and have purchased a work from this artist. While he is not well known, his works have gained something of a cult following and I look forward to seeing many of them on display when they come to the City Reliquary in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. The information in this article is accurate and this page should not be considered for deletion.

• —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sah293 (talk • contribs). — Sah293 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Sah293 is a new user, but has made edits to other articles and has not edited Joseph (artist) at all, so the previous comment is misleading. Tyrenius 03:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ok, but you saying that you met him is not a WP:RS. Can you provide any evidence that he exists from a reputable, published source? Leuko 02:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete unless sourced per WP:ATT. I loves me some outsider art but without sources it's just a blog entry. -- Dhartung | Talk 04:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Non-notable without verification. Also, I'm not exactly sure, but Image:Joseph alien abduction.jpg appears to be a copyright violation - it was uploaded without proof of the original artist's permission. +A.0u 04:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No reliable sources so notability cannot be verified. StuartDouglas 10:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:BIO. The images are likely copyvios as well. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete: Sheer nonsense. Bus stop 14:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: A reference has been added to the article. I retract my statement that it is "sheer nonsense." I still doubt that one reference denotes notability. But it is something that should be considered. Bus stop 00:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment: That one source is pretty much self-published, and thus not a reliable source... I'm not sure we have satisfied WP:A yet, much less WP:N... Leuko 01:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
• Such pretention here! Joseph's art is as valid and dare I say important as any subway art created by you or I. Having seen some of this noble creatures art in person I can assure you that god willing it will out live us all!
• —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.253.174.70 (talk • contribs).
• Anon's 11th edit. Tyrenius 00:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Such condescension here! "This noble creature...". For good or bad, notability needs to be established. I'm sure Joseph's art will out-live me. At the moment, however, without verifiable references, he lacks the notability to be included in an encyclopedia. That's not pretension. Freshacconci 18:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep: Despite the fact that Joseph is not well-known enough to have been published, possibly due to him being homeless and poor, this page should be kept up in a visible location long enough for others to find and update it. Can it be moved so that it is found when "Joseph" is searched, thus giving visitors the opportunity to fill in needed details, such as reputable sources, more life information, etc? I am OK with it having a disclaimer warning that the article is up for deletion, but please at least let it be found so somebody may provide more information if possible. This is an entry that is so far out of the realm of "Google," so please bear with it. Thank you.

• —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.116.143.242 (talk • contribs). Tyrenius 03:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
• Anon has made only 6 edits, all related to this subject. Tyrenius 00:03, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Please sign your input to this discussion with four tildes. Might I suggest that you save the article's content so that if it gets deleted you can more easily recreate it if you get sources to back up the subjects notability? Bus stop 18:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, absolutely no second party sources therefore failing WP:A, besides WP:BIO for artists requires independent critical acclaim (none here), the inclusion in a major collection (non here) or that the work is part of a documentary (non here) Alf^Photoman 23:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - per nom. Fails WP:BIO Special Cases. Ronbo76 00:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete reluctantly - not notable as artist. Might have better chance as feature of street life in NY. There is however at least one other web mention, which I have added to the article. Also a special Johnbod award for most likeable art in a visual arts related deletion so far in 2007 Johnbod 23:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy delete? This is obviously a hoax, we should not waste any more time with this sort of nonsense. Burntsauce 17:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • "Burntsauce?" That is obviously not a name for someone credible. Delete his account. Its me sam 19:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Unfortunately, hoaxes aren't a speedy deletion criterion. And calling an editor not credible and calling for the deletion of his/her account is uncivil, if not a personal attack. Leuko 05:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Sorry, but I don't think User:Its me sam said anything wrong. It is a perfectly appropriate response. One statement called the art an obvious hoax. The response was to call the user name obviously not credible. I think that is a very economical way of pointing to the fault in the first statement. Nothing uncivil or of a personal attack nature. And, it is not unfortunate that hoaxes are not a speedy deletion criteria. Rather, it is fortunate. Bus stop 13:50, 24 March 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.