Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Biography
General information (edit · changes)
Departments
Infoboxes
More biography infoboxes...
Biography work groups
Things you can do (edit)
Biography article statistics

This list is generated automatically on alternate nights.
view full worklist

Biography
articles		 Importance
Top None Total
Quality
Featured article FA 21 480 501
A 2 19 21
Good article GA 24 966 990
B 151 14396 14547
Start 2 110533 110535
Stub 336778 336778
List 111 111
Assessed 200 463283 463483
Unassessed 56189 56189
Total 200 519472 519672
Shortcut:
WP:WPBIOA&E
Arts and Entertainment Work Group

The Arts and Entertainment Work Group is a working group of members of the Biography WikiProject dedicated to ensuring quality and coverage of biography articles.

Biography (arts and entertainment)
articles		 Importance
Top High Mid Low None Total
Quality
Featured article FA 7 7 14 3 29 60
A 1 1 2
Good article GA 8 11 12 16 29 76
B 34 93 208 220 868 1423
Start 1 77 667 2775 6914 10434
Stub 1 30 545 4692 39615 44883
Assessed 52 218 1447 7706 47455 56878
Unassessed 33 33
Total 52 218 1447 7706 47488 56911


Related Projects

Since biographies are potentially under the purview of almost all WikiProjects, it is important that we work in tandem with these projects. Also, when seeking collaboration on articles, don't neglect to approach WikiProjects that are part of the geographical region your subject is/was in.

Related Portals

Increase the exposure of our work group by nominating our articles for their Portal FA and DYKs... Specific discipline portals are listed in that section.

Navigation
Articles
Announcements/To Do (edit)

Add this to-do list to your User page! {{Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Arts and entertainment/Announcements}}

[edit] Directions for expanding any division below

The general outline and collection has been started, but if you would like to expand and organize a discipline, here's what you do. Right below the page heading for the discipline insert this: {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Work groups/Division banner}} and save. This will put a rough outline together for you and then you can edit it to conform to your area. See Writers and critics below for an example. If your project grows large enough where it's taking up a good portion of this page, you should probably move it to a subpage of this page.

You might also want to make a Members section for people to join your specific area!

[edit] Tagging articles

Any article related to this work group should be marked by adding a&e-work-group=yes to the {{WPBiography}} project banner at the top of its talk page This will automatically place it into Category:Arts and entertainment work group articles.

[edit] Members

  1. come help with the Bronwen Mantel article Smith Jones 22:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  2. Lovelaughterlife (talk · contribs) Worked extensively on some biographies; reverted vandalism some others
  3. Truth in Comedy (talk · contribs)
  4. Warlordjohncarter (talk · contribs)
  5. Ozgod (talk · contribs)
  6. Susanlesch (talk · contribs), mostly inactive
  7. EraserGirl (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  8. Shruti14 (talk · contribs) will help when I can

[edit] General

[edit] Infoboxes

[edit] Requested articles

The Unfathomable Vastmess of God by Professor Muhammad Khan Hastal www.sdc-ckl.tk mkminhas2003@yahoo.com contact on this address for this book

[edit] Actors

[edit] Architects

[edit] Artists

[edit] Announcements/To-Do

[edit] Categories

[edit] Illustrators

[edit] Painters

[edit] Photographers

[edit] Sculptors

[edit] Comic artists

[edit] Visual arts deletions

[edit] Visual arts

[edit] ForestWander Nature Photography

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/ForestWander Nature Photography
ForestWander Nature Photography (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

A father and son company that takes photos of rural West Virginia and that gives many of them away via the internet. They were once a finalist in one category of a competition, and I'm willing to believe that there was once an article about them in the Charleston Gazette (although either its server or my browser refuses to display this). And -- plastic at the ready? -- you may choose to purchase the prints too, via the links thoughtfully provided in the article.

However, Wikipedia is not a web directory, the company doesn't seem to have won any competitions, there's no mention of any exhibitions or substantial coverage in any magazines (let alone book-length publication), and it all seems of very minor note; unless of course you want free screensavers of rural West Virginia, in which case Google will no doubt locate them for you.

Moreover, the only contributor of substance to this article has been User:Forestwanderer. I start to suspect COI.

I prodded this article on 6 June. Forestwanderer proceeded to make a number of edits to the page, which to me indicated a desire to keep it; I therefore removed the prod notice myself.

The last of the edits by Forestwanderer has a summary pointing people to further justifications to be read on the talk page. Yes, do take a look: it's quite revealing. -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chalkmaster

Chalkmaster (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 22:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete. The lack of any non-local coverage and a relatively scant amount of local coverage given the links provided in the article leads me to the same conclusion as that of the nominator. Erechtheus (talk) 01:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as per above. Artene50 (talk) 02:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete for not notable. Tabor (talk) 02:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 06:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. As a Torontonian myself, his "legend" nevertheless seems to have escaped me. There are plenty of sidewalk chalk artists up here. He seems no more notable then the rest. freshacconcispeaktome 14:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Matt Couper

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/Matt Couper
 Articles for deletion/Matt Couper (2nd nomination)
Matt Couper (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

conflict of interest: article created by subject, self-promotional, dubious notability Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 20:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, unless "presented in major collections throughout New Zealand" can be referenced, and includes public collections as per WP:BIO. Johnbod (talk) 22:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability seems marginal at best, no sources other than the artist's own website, and autobiography.-gadfium 22:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. All I can find are some group exhibitions [1], [2] and a $250 prize [3]. Not notable yet.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 23:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:NN & WP:RS.  Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 00:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete This 4 year old article fails WP:BIO and independent WP:RS and was likely made by the subject of the article himself here Artene50 (talk) 01:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Slightly stronger than weak delete. Although WP:UNKNOWNHERE and its corollary are lousy arguments for AfD, I'd have to say that, having worked in the New Zealand art scene for many years as a reviewer and artist, I have heard of him, though not very much. I know he's exhibited at the Sarjeant in Wanganui, though, which is one of the country's better know provincial galleries. Whether it's enough to meet notability standards here, though, I doubt. And I can't find much evidence of his work being in major collections nationwide. BTW, "Matt couper" +art -wikipedia returns some 650 ghits. Grutness...wha? 01:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - I can't find any reliable sources for this article. Soxred 93 03:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - no claim of notability. An artist is expected to have some semi-notable art. --T-rex 03:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - I don't turn up any substantial news references to this fellow, and being in collections doesn't really prove notability to my view. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:51, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per the above Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Andrew Logan

Andrew Logan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Makes a lot of claims, but no real assertation of notability. He's had his art everywhere, but I don't see any reliable sources about him. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 18:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Reluctant Keep he's been written about and seems recognised by the press which presumably gets over Notability issues - one of 20 'celebs' in this [4] and known for his Alternative Miss World [5], and seems to be a Derek Jarman short film about him [6] article about him and his museum on BBC [7] though that is local news section.-Hunting dog (talk) 19:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
oh and in the collection of the National Portrait Gallery [8], that provides an independant citation for the "retrospective was held at the Museum of Modern Art, Oxford, in 1991" *walks away muttering IDONTLIKEIT...* (modern art not anything personal to the BLP)-Hunting dog (talk) 21:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 22:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep "Claims" are assertions of notability, TPH! And in this case they are mostly justified. Certainly notable, though more referencing needed. He was most famous before the internet age, but there will be plenty in print. Johnbod (talk) 22:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Works in the NPG and the Arts Council collection [9] (it's a Flash site, but he'll show up if you search his name).--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep seems like an article with worthwhile potential...Modernist (talk) 04:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
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 keep - sufficient reliable sources provided to establish notability. Spartaz Humbug! 21:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Klein (art activist)

Paul Klein (art activist) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Notability not established —G716 <T·C> 18:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Article is of low quality, and importance. DeadmanUndertaker 18:56, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete have tried looking for ref's but only seems to have local news mentions, so think fails notability - Hunting dog (talk) 20:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep and improve. Over 10k ghits for '"Paul Klein" art Chicago', ok lots off his blog, but he seems a notable figure there. Article was created in Feb 7 by a three-edit username, so no help to be expected from there. Johnbod (talk) 10:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment - I came back to look at this actually with a view to maybe withdrawing delete, I agree there's lots of cross blog talk about him, but I can't actually source some of the existing claims, though info might be out there somewhere. Re being "a contributor to the New York Times", NYT is pretty well archived but couldn't get hits on this Paul Klein on their site, [10] google search brings up something he wrote for the Chicago Life supplement of the Sunday New York Times (which seems to be a regional advertising supplement). Think article might shrink rather than grow unless someone else is more successful in finding reliable sources for the info. -Hunting dog (talk) 05:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 04:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. There are plenty of reliable sources found by Google News [11]. I've put some of them in the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - seems unnecessary advertising, blog ad infinitum. Modernist (talk) 15:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep as revised by Phil Bridger, I feel this satisfies WP:BIO at this time. RFerreira (talk) 16:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep and improve. Paul Klein is a critical faculty in Chicago's art community whose efforts extend beyond curation or self-interest. Well-worth inclusion here. Agreed that a cursory web search yields insufficient background, but sure that sufficient press exists, confident that Wikipedia page is good basis for ongoing compilation, opportunity to review Klein's legacy and impact. Please keep and allow recognition in searches. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgfunderburk (talk • contribs) 19:13, 9 June 2008 (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.

[edit] Visual arts Proposed deletions

[edit] Comedians

[edit] Dancers

[edit] Directors

[edit] Musicians

[edit] Poets


[edit] Writers and critics

Arts and Entertainment Work Group - Writers and critics

The Arts and Entertainment Work Group - Writers and critics is a working group of members of the Biography WikiProject dedicated to ensuring quality and coverage of biography articles.

Related Projects

Since biographies are potentially under the purview of almost all WikiProjects, it is important that we work in tandem with these projects. Also, when seeking collaboration on articles, don't neglect to approach WikiProjects that are part of the geographical region your subject is/was in.

Related Portals

Increase the exposure of our work group by nominating our articles for their Portal FA and DYKs. Of course, don't forget the main portal, Portal:Arts

FAs and GAs
Announcements/To do (edit)

[edit] Members

[edit] Lists

[edit] Stubs

[edit] Categories

[edit] Comic writers

[edit] Articles for deletion

[edit] Authors

[edit] Mojtaba Pourmohsen

Mojtaba Pourmohsen (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This page was originally up for speedy deletion under A7, but I declined it because the article makes claims of notability. I think that this poet might be notable enough, because he appears to have won national journalism awards and has been connected to censorship practices in Iran. There aren't a lot of google hits, but many of them are in Arabic, so I can't read them. I did manage to find one article in English that mentions him. Overall, I'm ambivalent about this article. I stand by my declination of the speedy, but if the community decides that there just isn't enough out there about this guy, it should be deleted. Danaman5 (talk) 09:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment to add to above: I should also mention that I was searching for the romanization of his name in Google. If you searched for his name written in Arabic script, you would probably get more results. Unfortunately, I don't know Arabic.--Danaman5 (talk) 18:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dora Pavel

Dora Pavel (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

I see no reson that this person is notable in the english speaking world. maybe on the romanian wikipedia. also, writer of article repeatedly removed templates from article. Sexy Sea Bassist 16:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. -- Bláthnaid 17:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep The writer has received awards for her work and been written about, which makes her notable. Notability on en.wikipedia is not limited to the English-speaking world. It does not matter what language she writes in, as sources can be translated by editors that speak Romanian. Bláthnaid 17:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Independent coverage of subject who's won awards in her field. Sounds notable per WP:BIO to me. WilliamH (talk) 18:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - notable. non-english is not a reason to delete --T-rex 04:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Being notable in Romania (and France) also makes the person notable in the English-speaking world. – sgeureka t•c 12:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Brian Costello

Brian Costello (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable writer who fails WP:BIO. His single book, out from a micro-press in the Midwest, fails WP:BK. Qworty (talk) 02:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Gamaliel (talk) 17:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - I did some research and I've added a few references. He gets news coverage through his band (a full article in the Chicago Tribune), for his stage show (the Tribune again for the big article, and other mentions here and there), and multiple reviews of his book. Not the most notable person around, by any means, but should meet the requirements. - Bilby (talk) 09:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, with the work done by Bilby, I believe he meets the basic criteria in WP:BIO, "he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." --Captain-tucker (talk) 15:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shereth 22:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Enough sources found by Bilby to show notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Martin Auz

Martin Auz (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Autobiography, non-notable —G716 <T·C> 19:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 00:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - no claim of notablity --T-rex 03:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Vallance (writer)

Tom Vallance (writer) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Questionable notability, no directly referenced sources. --/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 00:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Note discussion is red-linked from article, attempting to fix with this cmt. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 02:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete. Notability not even asserted, much less demonstrated. Qworty (talk) 10:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. Identifying the subject of the article as a regular writer/columnist/reviewer for at least two major publications, as well as the author of two books in his journalistic area, is certainly an assertion of notability. While Vallance apparently did his most substantial work in the preWeb area, even a rudimentary Google search turns up, for example, a description of him as an "expert" in his field from reliable sources, eg [12]. The Enchantress Of Florence (talk) 04:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Fulfills notability criteria. Shovon (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong keep for The Enchantress Of Florence's reasons. ~ Antiselfpromotion (talk) 17:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note:Since this discussion was never linked properly from the article I have relisted it for discussion. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 02:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 02:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete unless reliable secondary sources describing the subject can be found. The current article appears to only be based on editor synthesis from primary sources. Whatever his achievements if they can't be verified by citing independent sources it will not be possible to write a neutral, original research free article about the subject. Guest9999 (talk) 04:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Can't find significant coverage on him. Every writer for a newspaper will have his name palstered throughout Google. But hits alone do not suffice for notability. There must be significant coverage of the article's subject, of which is lacking. Neither is being an "expert" considered notable for Wikipedia purposes. Every expert doesn't require an encyclopedia article written about him. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
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 keep. John254 16:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Diamond Joe Esposito

Diamond Joe Esposito (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

NN & spam, author has been spamming other articles with links to this rogerd (talk) 02:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep. The spamming behaviour is inappropriate, but I have to say keep for the article on Diamond Joe, despite it's current poor quality. Putting aside the issue of whether his books make him notable or not, I would say he's a notable figure for the role he played in Elvis Presley's life, and there are certainly a bunch of third-party references I can find on the internet. However, I think it would not be inappropriate to consider moving the page, since he is really the namesake of the "real" Diamond Joe. I think this particular page should probably be a DAB page that links to both Diamond Joes.
  • Comment. Incidentally, User:V0taire (the spammer) deleted the AfD template from the article. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notability is clearly demonstrated by the sources found by Google Books and Google News, including [13] [14] [15] [16]. Editor behaviour should be dealt with by discussion, warnings, blocks etc., not by deleting articles on notable subjects. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:02, 8 June 2008 (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.

[edit] Authors Proposed deletions