Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arte Mecco

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. 1ne 21:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arte Mecco

At best, the non-notable style of a single artist. At worst a hoax. Rmhermen 02:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete vanity/hoax article which is a pet project of some user. Google test outputs 237 hits, being the top result the wikipedia article itself and the following a stream of wiki articles. --Mecanismo | Talk 12:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • delete per WP:NFT. "Art Mecco" scores zeeero relevant Ghits (outside wiki). Fewer than 25 relavent Ghits out of 581 for "Hugeaux", and the Ghits almost exclusively linked to that style. The Artist's style borrows heavily from Art Deco and Gustav Klimt, and has clearly also borrowed the "Art deco" moniker in order to create a new identity/category for his art. The artist appears to have the endorsement of the 'National Conference of Artists of New York' (3 relevantsites linking to) and the Art Deco society of Washington (about 10 relevant external sites linking to). The NCA is headed by Margaret T. Burrows, who appears notable enough her bio here. On the surface, the wiki article also seems to be a copyvio of this page, but its main author is infact User:Hugeaux, and who has no edits other than this article, so it also falls foul of WP:AUTO, and WP:V. I would conclude that neither the artist nor the style are notable. Ohconfucius 04:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
PS If someone know how to and cares, a proposal for deletion of wiktionary item of the same spelling would appear in order. Created by the same author. It has already been tagged "rfv'"Ohconfucius

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Arte Mecco. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review.

  • Undelete. This is a nomination for undeletion. This article is not a hoax or an attempt to self promote. Thank you to all the editors who have help this article to look and appear better. Please continue your efforts. Arte Mecco is in its adolescent stage as with other genres of art throughout history (Art Deco, Cubism, Avant-Garde, etc.). It is recognized by several art associations and artists. Never in the history of art has an artist fully documented a concept which uses natural pigments and theories. This is the reason many viewers see the article on Arte Mecco as a cognitive method for explaining an art genre during their time and their research. A special thanks to the editor(s) who has change the name: History of Arte Mecco to Arte Mecco to make for better Wikipedia research. You are true troopers.Hugeaux 06:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Wikipedia is not here as the promotional tool for an unnoteworthy 'artist'. Nunquam Dormio 09:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Undelete include is an paster statement and earlier editor assisted in support of the article. It is as follow:Please remove the tags from the article. Thank you Khatru2 for directing me towards, Wikipedia:Autobiography for assistance. I hope that this statement within its confines shall validate the article, because as a reference it pretains to my purpose:

One thing which you can do to assist other Wikipedia editors is, if you already maintain a personal website, please ensure that any information that you want in your Wikipedia article is already on your own website. As long as it's not involving grandiose claims like, "I was the first to create this widget," or "My book was the biggest seller that year," a personal website can be used as a reference for general biographical information. As the Wikipedia Verifiability policy states: Self-published sources and other published sources of dubious reliability may be used as sources in articles about themselves . . . so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by other published sources.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autobiograph64.12.116.66 21:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Hugeaux 21:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Please vote only once. Thank you. Khatru2 23:40, 28 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.