Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Eatock

Daniel Eatock

Daniel Eatock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article clearly fails WP:CREATIVE, in that this person is solely notable for designing one particular logo. Being nominated for an award, and working for a particular design consultancy, are not in themselves claims to notability. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 09:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

• Keep: This article meets WP:GNG. This artist has received Significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject as demonstrated by close to 50 hits on Google News. Article should be expanded with referenced information, not deleted. Pooet (talk) 15:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

  Does it meet the notability guideline for artists and creative professionals? ╟─TreasuryTag►duumvirate─╢ 15:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
• Delete - being the creator of a logo used in a televised game show is insufficient for WP:CREATIVE (and it's not even worth the redirect to the article on the show). Much more needs to be demonstrated to meet WP:BIO. B.Wind (talk) 17:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
• Another comment: This is an award winning nominated artist. The "Big Brother" eye is not his only accomplishement. Per WP:GNG it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article if the topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources. A google news search alone shows close to 50 hits for this person, and there are many more websites that carry independent and significant coverage to satisfy the inclusion criteria. Pooet (talk) 15:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

  Is he an award-winning artist? Can you back that claim up with a reliable source, and you yourself add several more to the article to bring it up to the required standard? ╟─TreasuryTag►inspectorate─╢ 15:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It took me all of one minute to find dozens of websites to verify that this artist was short-listed for the Design of the year award. Here's links to five of those sites (you can look up the rest yourself):

Design Museum in London shortlist for Design of the Year

Brit Insurance Design Awards 2009 - Shortlist Announcement

Brit Insurance Designs of the Year 2009 now on View at the Design Museum

Design awards announce shortlist

Most Comprehensive Design Awards in the World Announces Shortlist Pooet (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It would have taken me all of one minute as well. But he was not an award-winner as you falsely claimed so those links are irrelevant. The relevant guideline requires him to be a winner, as one threshold of notability. Can you not see the difference? ╟─TreasuryTag►estoppel─╢ 17:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Those links are relevant in that he is an artist who has been nominated for the Design Award. The "threshold is met per WP:GNG (I am repeating myself so it must be true) - "topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources".. Now that we have both made our points (repeatly), I suggest that we allow other editors to have their say. Pooet (talk) 02:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 14:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)