Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marco Mann

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, the reliable sources are yet to be found as per WP:NN/WP:BIO. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 14:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marco Mann

Marco Mann (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Artist with a single exhibition in home town, fails WP:BIO, PROD contested by author who failed to provide sources, left a long argument on my talk page about how corruption in Egypt, Library of Alexandria influence on community , and lack of human rights are the reason I wanted to delete the page, not simply the fact that he failed to provide reliable sources, This article being the sole major contribution of the author, I suspect WP:AUTOBIO, but I want to assume good faith.Shipmaster 17:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Wiki:bio .. Please read this and follow the links before voting and if you have already voted, please reconsider your vote after reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BIO#Special_cases ... In several of the cases on that page the Marco Mann article would qualify him for wiki:bio ... 1. Wide name recognition (among the online community related to the Arts) .. 2. The person made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field. (This is definitely the case with the International group for Art and Culture: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Art_and_Culture 3. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. 4. The person has created a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. (please check the Art and Culture group and you will find the periodical articles and reviews posted by the artist in the message archives.) 5. The person's work either (a) has been displayed in a significant exhibition or as a monument (b) has won significant critical attention, or (c) is represented within the permanent collection of a significant gallery or museum of more than local significance. (Marco Mann has works exhibited in public locations in both Alexandria and Cairo, and one of his paintings in the property of the Ministry of Culture, And he has sold work in 4 US states, in Canada, in Holland, in Denmark, in Spain, in Jerusalem, and of course in Cairo and Alexandria.) .. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Art_and_Culture/messages/1346?l=1 messages for art.and.culture.group@gmail.com (Art & Culture) are the ongoing work of Marco Mann that date back to 2004.Jumpster 11:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. With all due respect . . . anyone can create a Yahoo! Group. Anyone. Having a Yahoo! Group does not qualify in the least as creating something that is part of an enduring historical record. Not even close. Of more interest is what you say about his having work publicly exhibited in Alexandria and Cairo. That might possibly satisfy 5(a), depending on the details of those exhibitions. Were those exhibitions "significant"?
wow, this is so strange!!!Jumpster 01:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
    • And if they were truly significant . . . then I'm left to wonder why in the world that information is absent from the article? The most direct answer, of course, would be that the information is not in the article because the information is not on the artist's website, and the article is nothing more than a direct copy of the text on that website. Which leads to two things: #1) Per Cricket02, the fact that the article is nothing more than a direct copy of the artist's website is actually another very good reason to delete the article, and #2) if the exhibitions were of true significance . . . then why would the artist not mention that on his own website? Mwelch 20:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually the article was added to the homepage after the Vfd started. It's a good article why let it go to waste if wikipedia doesnt want it? Jumpster 01:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment OK, thank you for clarifying that about the article vs. the web site. If that is the case, then I would withdraw the copying argument as a reason for deletion. (The fact that you have such immediate and direct access to his personal website, certainly makes one wonder about WP:COI, though.) But aside from all of that, the rest still stands. If it is your claim that his Cairo and Alexandra exhibitions satisfy 5(a), then the article needs to mention them and (if they are not themselves well-known) explain why they are significant. Mwelch 01:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
also, (and I will add this below) ethnicpaintings.com used a number of different sources to come up with their article!!! and from what I know, Marco Mann is not pleased with this, as his work is NOT ethnic, but very universal! Jumpster 01:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC) The bias in here is unbelievable!!
Comment. Yes, I agree that you do seem to be a very biased fan of this artist. Mwelch 01:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete - only source cited is his own website, hence no evidence of multiple non-trivial coverage in independent sources to establish notability per WP:BIO. Delete unless appropriate soures are added by the end of this AfD. Walton Vivat Regina! 19:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Neutral - Per the comments made by Jumpster on my talk page, I'm going to withdraw from this debate. Walton Vivat Regina! 17:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Article fails to assert notability. Caknuck 20:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

*Keep Article is as good as other wiki articles about Artists. I suspect bad faith from the nominator who is from the artist's hometown. check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Painter_stubs and you will see that 70% of the articles there lack the kind of references that the nominator claims are necessary to establish notablility. Out of all fairness, if you want to delete an article you should delete all similar articles. Otherwise, vote to keep. Jumpster 23:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC) .. and while at it why not delete http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seif_Wanly .. after all there are no citations of references, only that those who know him will know that there is a museum devoted to his work. (I created this article too, but I lost my old username as it had no password.)

  • delete After some thought, I have become convinced that Marco Mann doesnt qualify for wikipedia. Maybe as an artist he is not yet so a clear a picture for the framed eyes of wiki to see. The fact that I know that he is notable and significant in his endeavour, doesnt mean that others here on wikipedia will know too. The whole area that I was coming from is that people who exist and are active should exist on wikipedia too .. I understood wikipedia to be an encyclopedia of the past, present and future, not just a historic document similar to the archiac paper encyclopedias it rivals. But seems to me that its just a book of History, a valuable one nonetheless, which I shall continue to use as a reference, but will refrain from editing and will try to even delete my user account. Jumpster 23:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
    • The difference is that it is relatively easy to demonstrate Seif Wanly's notability, despite the article's regrettable failure to cite any sources. You can get a sense of it just from Googling him, and that is despite the fact that Google is Western-centric and he was Egyptian. When one considers what must be out there about him that's in Arabic and not so easily Googled . . . well, I don't see that there is much reason to doubt his notability (though it would certainly be nice if someone more familiar with the sources that surely must exist about him would indeed please cite them).
    • As for Mr. Mann, however . . . well, I don't see a similar indication when I Google him. Admittedly, though, Google is not everything. Perhaps he also is vicitimized here by Google's Western-centrism. So can you offer another reason reason to think Marco Mann also has such notability? As it stands, all we have is basically you saying, "Trust me, he's notable." If you have something more than that, then please do share. If not, though . . . well, so what if there are other articles with the same problem as the Mann article? WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If any of those other articles are nominated, and if there doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that the deficiency is just in the citations, as is the case with the Seif Wanly article, rather than in the subject's actual notability, then I indeed would vote to delete. Mwelch 00:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
These are two independent sources verifying notability of Seif Wanly, and they were very easy to find using google, one is the reputable Al-Ahram and the other is a popular book by Naguib Mahfouz illustrated by him, I only asked you to provide similar notability sources as suggested by WP:BIO. --Shipmaster 23:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
If I manage to provide such after the AFD, then I will put the burden of re-writing the article in both Arabic and English on You. Jumpster 08:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
    • There is also evidence from my discussions with the nominator, that he is active in Alexandria and takes his Alexandrian identity seriously and is active in the Library of Alexandria, so it is possible that he was personally irritated by the comparison between Alexandria and Cairo in the Article .. after all the article survived 3 months without trouble, until the Alexandrian came along and paid us a visit. I think personal attitudes should not be basis for nominating articles for Afd and that is why I think that this nomination is Invalid and should be called off. In fact I think that wikipedia should put limits on who can use the Afd tool, possibly only sysops. Jumpster 09:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Come on dude, that's pretty lame, if I thought that phrase was offensive I would have edited it out instead of an AfD, I suggest you focus on providing said sources as I mentioned here and in our discussion instead of attacking me, that will get you nowhere.--Shipmaster 12:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Seems it will get us no where anyhow. I dont think I should focus on what you Said should be done, but rather focus on the Legitimacy of your nomination, which I find to be very illigitimate, especially since the article has been in place for months before you attacked it, and it is very likely that you attacked it for Personal Reasons, you have failed to provide a good reason for the attack!! Are there any other articles that you attacked for the same reasons you stated above? or is your attack limited to Marco Mann? Jumpster 17:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Voters are encouraged to follow the discussions on the nominator's and author's pages to get further insight into the personal nature of the nomination http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Shipmaster#Marco_Mann
Fine ,dude, whatever, your alleged insights into the intentions of an article nominator will not have any effect on deletion of the article if you dont provide credible sources, I am not biting your bait anymore, have better things to do...--Shipmaster 18:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No evidence yet offered of notability. Mwelch 00:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Ditto. No reliable sources to establish notability. Probably should have been speedied in the first place for copyright infringement from the personal website. Cricket02 18:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Keep A person who votes for removal of an article just coz they haven't heard of an artist doesn't justify that the artist has no talent, and commercial exposure of art does not add any value to it, as it simply depends on whether the artist expressed him/herself or not. Art is about expression not about how many people have seen it, nor how many times it was exposed to the public. Moreover, critics are there to only critisize, that's where the name stemms from. Yet, whether they critisize or not, it does not add nor remove value from art. I vote to KEEP the article, as I don't see a point in removing any information from any encyclopedia... information is information... Plus, I've seen some of his work, and it does express points of views and concepts. I also am surprized to have someone vote for removing the article... coz, I do think that this is narrow mindedness and maybe even irrelevance. —Djehanne (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Delete It is precisely because there are many artists. notable and not notable, that many of us have not heard of , and because most of us do not set themselves up as a judge of artistic merit, that we rely upon secondary sources such as reviews. An artist who produces work that is thought by the professionals in the field to be worth renewing will be reviewed, and the artist's work will be accepted into juried exhibitions. DGG 18:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Well-said DGG. Yahoo Groups is not by far a reliable secondary source. As said, any Joe Shmoe can post on it. If indeed this artist were notable, there would be something out there printed about him and his work other than self-published/self-promotional writings. So I've spent the better part of an hour giving an honest effort to searching for such secondary reliable sources, insofar as translating foreign pages, and have come up with nothing. I did, however, come up with EthnicPaintings.com but I suspect it to be self-published as well. I'm sorry, but I have no choice but to stick with delete. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cricket02 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC). Cricket02 00:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
ethnicpaintings.com used a number of different sources to come up with their article!!! and from what I know, Marco Mann is not pleased with this, as his work is NOT ethnic, but very universal! Jumpster 01:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC) The bias in here is unbelievable!!
  • delete. no reliable sources, no mention of him except for the "Yahoo group" and his website. fails WP:BIO. Also, I'm from Alexandria (studying in the fine arts field) and never heard about him --Mido 19:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment Instead of making assumptions ask direct questions!! Is there something out there printed about him?? The Answer is yes. Provide a mailing address and I will happily provide you with a copy of each! Jumpster 23:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Jumpster, the sources you have don't HAVE to have an internet link. But that is about all reviewers have to go by, an internet search engine, to look for sources if none are provided. If you, indeed, have written sources that will indeed establish notability, by all means, please list them in the article, any and all information you can, i.e. title, date, author, page #, etc. Also, you really must assert more notability in the article than you have, like the exhibitions you claim, write that in. I as well don't understand why you state it here in this debate but not in the article. Because really, the Yahoo group he runs might be popular, but I run one too, but that doesn't make me notable either. Lastly, the article must be rewritten because as it stands right now it is a copyright violation of the website, a no-no on Wikipedia. Reword it. Make these changes and I, for one, will reconsider. Oh, also, I don't believe there is any bias involved at all, so making accusations will get us nowhere. The nominator had just cause to send to Afd and so far there is consensus to delete only according to the notability guidelines set forth by WP:Bio. All we're asking is for you to further establish that assertion of notability. Cricket02 01:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete. Fails the WP:BIO and of course Yahoo! Groups are not to be used as a source in a living person biography. Yamaguchi先生 01:19, 17 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.