Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tania Dibbs
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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. Mfield (Oi!) 06:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Tania Dibbs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Creation of single purpose account, no google web or news results aside from local newspapers; gallery showings only within the US; no major awards listed; no museum collections, only corporate and private collections. Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 01:20, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. —Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, I don't like the lack of references, and where did the info come from to make the article? The paintings look good, but the link for Tania Dibbs' interview on Fusemedia is broken. I see nothing wrong with local newspapers as references, but non are given and as it stands looks like a delete unless backed up by third party references. --Artypants, Babble 16:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There's an article in the Aspen Times,[1] and Aspen Daily News.[2] A paragraph in University of Virginia Alumni news.[3] Ty 10:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The local press doesn't cut it for me, even less so the University of Virginia Alumni news. Working artist, not notable.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 23:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Sources found to date are not sufficient to justify an article. Ty 13:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete doesn't seem to be encyclopedic yet...Modernist (talk) 23:47, 6 April 2009 (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.