Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nedim Kufi

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. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nedim Kufi

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

fails WP:ARTIST التاريخ معلم (talk) 14:06, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG significant coverage in multiple reliable sources from at least three different countries shows international notability for me. Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 14:47, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – This person passes WP:BASIC and WP:GNG: [1], [2], [3], [4]. Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:13, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 01:10, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 01:10, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The notability of this artist is questionable at best. A lot of text with few references. Some of the links copied and pasted by Quasihuman is nothing but interviews, one of which is an abstract. Aren't interviews primary sources and therefore not allowed on Wiki?Tamsier (talk) 03:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Primary sources are allowed but only for noncontroversial facts. An interview might be problemnatic re: WP:N - it can be reasonably construed as a primary source, yes, but the interviewer thoguht the subject was notable enough to be interviewed... - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:20, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appears to meet WP:GNG. I'm always a bit suspicious of a high text/references ratio, but that's not a policy-based rationale for deletion. --j⚛e decker ^talk 13:46, 2 July 2012 (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.