Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Waddell

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-13 22:21Z

[edit] Scott Waddell

Scott Waddell (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Image:ScottWaddellPortrait.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (added by closing admin)

Non-notable young artist with no references or significant exhibition record. He may become notable some day, but he is not at this point. This is self-promotional and inappropriate for wikipedia. Freshacconci 15:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete unless sourced and referenced i.a.w. WP:BIO by end of this AfD Alf photoman 16:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - unreferenced. Only external links are to his own site, and to www.art.com (without any more specific directions). Assertions of his connections with John Edwards are unverified. Walton monarchist89 17:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete- fails WP:BIO Astrotrain 18:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - I like the art that I see at the web site, but without verifiable sources, it doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. If the editors can cite sources, I would change my vote. (It is my opinion that art that I consider insipid often meets Wikipedia's notability requirements, while art that seems good does not.) Bus stop 22:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom - his exhibition record is too scanty for him to rate an article. Herostratus 02:59, 10 February 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.