Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Augustus (2nd nomination)

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 deleted as G4. (non-admin closure) — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:43, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Augustus

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST quite clearly. The article is full of puffery (e.g. his work has been exhibited next to Hockney - this actually means some gallery he worked with once had a Hockney; this is typical of such bios) and its references exclusively point to links for his non-notable exhibitions or others he was coincidentally involved in. The best source about him is this Verge snippet that mentions him once. The argument for WP:ARTIST can't be supported given he has a single one-paragraph Time Out review. Simply doesn't cut it with no SIGCOV or artistic work of consequence (i.e. several significant reviews by notable sources). PK650 (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. PK650 (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. PK650 (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without goign too deep in a search, as my suspicions are in line with the nomination, the only decent sources I see at Theverge.com and frieze.com. Since the article promotes him as a very serious and notable artist, let's go with the WP:ARTIST criteria, for which sourcing is woefully inadequate. GNG-wise this seems to be also the case. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see also that this article has been speedy deleted, perhaps because we just had an AFD that resulted clearly in delete three months ago? In that case salt is also appropriate. I've also gone through most of the sources, which are largely minor mentions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable artist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:50, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and maybe salt, as this was just deleted, and then recreated by a SPA. I wonder about salt, because the subject is young, and thus this may be TOOSOON, and it might be appropriate in 5 years. Hard to tell.--Theredproject (talk) 17:30, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.