Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edna Blanchard

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. MelanieN (talk) 01:17, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edna Blanchard

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

Speedy Deletion WP:A7 declined despite no credible claim of significance in the article. Subject of the article does not meet WP:GNG. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:16, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:16, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:16, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, have added women artists project to article talkpage so that participants are notified of afd. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:18, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete She comes no where close to meeting any of the notability requirements for artists. No indication that any institution has included her work in a permanent collection. The people's choice award she won is no where near notable. She is a non-notable local artist whose bio may well be the result of an edit a thon conducted by people who really should have spent more time trying to understand that Wikipedia is not the place to engage in boosterism to try and make your town seem the next major up and coming art hub.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She's entirely non-notable. Non-existents refs, accomplishemnts listed are routine. 96.127.243.41 (talk) 08:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree, does not meet notability. --Theredproject (talk) 23:28, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agree with nom/Johnpacklambert.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 12:44, 12 March 2017 (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.