Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pál Balkay
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 keep. Gary King (talk) 05:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Pál Balkay
No real information can be found on this person; the person's artwork is the primary result when searching. Per WP:BIO. Gary King (talk) 21:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Well I'm gobsmacked by this afd nomination. Since when was google the yoda on knowledge?. I bet there are even many books on him in Hungarian, let alone tens of paintings in various major galleries. He has worked on many of the major cathedrals and churches in various towns in Hungary. oh but I forgot, wikipedia should remain systematically biased and base the construction of the encyclopedia on the United States. Why not target an article on the list of Pokemon or various childish lists rather than an article which is encyclopedic? A very strange selection for a deletion I must admit. There are several images of his paintings in the commons but he was aslo a noted sculptor and engraver. Its a stub yes and there doesn't appear to be much web info on him but even as it is I think it is worth it. I;m certain it could be expanded if somebody could find a book or something about Hungarian art. This page lists Pal Balkay under Pablo Picasso in an A-Z list of the top painters. Unfortunately that site they haven't got any reproductions of his paintings, but I seriously doubt he would be listed after Picasso if he was some amateur. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 21:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Strong keep per Blofeld of SPECTRE. EJF (talk) 21:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 21:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - The subject's work is clearly notable, as per the nominator's own statement. Given the notability of that work, and the fact that the article, even in its current state, does have biographical content, indicates that the subject and artwork combination of content is notable enough for an article based on the existing available evidence. It is of course very likely that further evidence is available, as per the above, but the notability of the artist/art combination, which is what the content deals with, is clearly notable enough for at least a single article. John Carter (talk) 21:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Important enough to be in reference works about artists. I don't get the comment about "the person's artwork is the primary result when searching". Mandsford (talk) 21:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Represented in the Hungarian national gallery, as can be seen from a search on that site. By the way, Google is much more successful searching for him using the Hungarian name order Balkay Pál than the name order used here: [1]. Also, a few hits in Google books. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep he seems to be notable (and Blofeld said it perfectly). jj137 (talk) 23:02, 18 February 2008 (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.
