Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barry Godber

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 Merge content merged into In the Court of the Crimson King article blanked and redirected to retain edit history as per GNU requirements. Gnangarra 04:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barry Godber

Barry Godber (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is about an artist who painted just one painting, and died at the age of 24 in 1970. He was also a computer programmer, although there is no indication whatsoever that anything he did in computer programming was notable in itself. Anyway, the painting in question just happens to be the cover art of the debut album of one of my favourite bands of all time, but I'm truly questioning how notable Barry Godber is going on this painting alone. Searching for his name minus the term "wikipedia" returns well under 1000 Google hits, which seem to be unofficial fan websites. Therefore he would not pass the notability guideline for biographies. Also, the article reads like a memorial, which is one thing that Wikipedia is of course not. However, if this does get deleted I will try merging the basic facts about him and the painting from this article to In the Court of the Crimson King. -h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 12:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Basic facts merged.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 12:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WjBscribe 00:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing notable in the article that isn't In the Court of the Crimson King. Mystache 01:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep. While the topic is not really notable on its own, this decent article conveys some contextual information about progressive rock, providing a local habitation for the vivid Fripp quote. No big deal, but I see no compelling reason to delete. Stammer 05:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and Delete, fails WP:BIO. I read over both articles, and if the only reason for the Godber article to exist is the Fripp quote, merge it over to the album.  RGTraynor  20:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable. Realkyhick 20:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and Delete on WP:BIO grounds. Any noteworthy information here can be merged to provide the same contextual information. Lemonsawdust 22:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment all relevant information has been merged already.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 11:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • merge and redirect to the album. possibly worth a mention there.--killing sparrows 16:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I agree with Stammer, above. Smeggysmeg 22:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - creating this one painting, given the widespread distribution and public awareness of the cover, is notable in and of itself, IMO. Colonel Tom 05:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect to the album. Everything essential is already there, and the article cannot stand because of one quote, no matter how "vivid". Wikipedia is not Wikiquote. But more importantly, there simply does not appear to be multiple reliable sources that discuss Godber in any more depth than a passing mention to credit the artist of the album cover. Serpent's Choice 11:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete He is a notable artist and computer programmer for which there is not enough WP:RS material to write an attributable article on the topic. Thus, the topic does not meet Wikipedia notability guidelines and the article cannot meet Wikipedia article policy standards.-- Jreferee 23:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect As HisSpaceResearch mentioned, the relevant information has already been merged into another article. Unless new information emerges to establish notability, a redirect would probably be the best course of action at this point. --Aarktica 12:43, 26 April 2007 (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.