Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Odhiambo Siangla

From 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. It'd be happy to userfy this on request. Petros471 16:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Odhiambo Siangla

Delete The subject of this biography may not be sufficiently notable for WP. The listed awards appear to be only scholarships and student awards. I could find no WP notability criteria for artists, but presumably they would include major shows reviewed by prominent art critics. Although "Odhiambo Siangla" produces a moderate number of google hits, most of these seem to be self-created or WP mirror sites. Possibly the page should not be deleted but instead converted to a user page. Nesbit 14:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment The relevant criteria seem to be these from WP:BIO

1. Published authors... who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work
2. Painters, sculptors, architects, engineers, and other professionals whose work is widely recognized (for better or worse) and who are likely to become a part of the enduring historical record of that field

The talk page of the article tells us that Siangla presented his work alongside other artists at a museum show in 1996. The show was summarized in a book by other authors published in that year. I found the book, which is now apparently out-of-print, on Amazon. The article tell us that Siangla later authored and published a book Conquering Space which I have been unable to locate by web and database searches. As mentioned, the awards are student scholarships, which, though meritorious, are not really notable. Unless verified evidence is presented, it seems clear to me that the body of work has not received 'multiple independent reviews' nor is it 'widely recognized.' Nesbit 16:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep. I suspect that he may not be notable enough either as an artist alone or as an academic alone; we do have guidelines for academic figures, and he doesn't seem to meet them. However, although he does seem to have a user account, and uploaded the image using it, the article was in fact created by someone else, or at least using another account. Not sure that making a user page is appropriate. This also suggests non-trivial interest by people other than the subject himself, and tips the scales in favour. - Smerdis of Tlön 17:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I see no references here, and as such none of the information in the article can be taken at face value. While there are a few awards attributed to him, there is no verification of those. I'd also submit that just because another account created the article, it wouldn't be the first time we've had sockpuppetry or a friend/relative create a vanity article about someone here.--Crossmr 17:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• weak delete (userfy acceptable) AGF would suggest that I assume Jamarenyo & Siangla are different people until proven otherwise, but it does require willful suspension of disbelief. As for notability claims, it seems appropriate to judge on the WP:PROF scale, and I don't see him passing that bar. Pete.Hurd 17:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

  its not that I'm assuming bad faith, I'm just saying I don't see that as a valid reason for keeping this article. You can assume good faith while being realistic.--Crossmr 18:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

  agreed, my comment was not intended to be read as a criticism of your position. Pete.Hurd 20:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unless verified. Dlyons493 Talk 22:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I think that the article needs to be cleaned up and strengthed. I dislike how an article goes staright to a nomination for deletion. This should have been put on a remedial track. --South Philly 00:36, 12 August 2006 (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.