Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhang Shuqi

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. Eluchil404 (talk) 04:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Zhang Shuqi

Zhang Shuqi (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

If this artist was notable, article didn't establish it. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 05:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Notability of importance to art isn't established. Most I could find on article is in this book Chinese Paintings in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford By S. J. Vainker Page 188(Google Book) and is almost word for word in what the wikipedia article is. I don't think this article will ever been improved better than this. This article could however could be included in another article of related subject perhaps. -Jahnx (talk) 12:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Per Stanford University's "The Shuqi Zhang Collection" here which includes a bio naming him as one of China’s most famous 20th century water color painters. He taught at a number of universities and was considered a goodwill ambassador from China in 1940's. The article could be improved by someone familiar with this field. KnightLago (talk) 16:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep I agree... the nominator didn't think that the British Museum was significant for Wu Guanzhong, so I'm sure that Stanford University registers either. But if he's notable enough for Stanford, he's notable enough for me. Mandsford (talk) 16:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep silly nom. Johnbod (talk) 22:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per KnightLago and Johnbod. The nominator should have separated out the borderline-cases from the obviously notable before taking to AfD.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 00:56, 16 March 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.