Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AHMED MATER

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. Non-admin closure. Jujutacular ^T · C 00:04, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AHMED MATER

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

This article was speedy deleted twice yesterday, so now skipping WP:PROD and bringing to AFD for the purpose. Subject does not appear to be notable. Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 16:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and clean up. The artist has exhibited at The Louvre and the British Museum, and appears to be a major player in the Saudi Arabian contemporary art scene. (I don't know how big a scene that is, but this artist appears to be making a name for himself among it.) Links in the article seem to assert his notability. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I have moved the page to Ahmed Mater for proper capitalization. I have no vote in the AfD discussion because this is not my area of expertise, but I agree that the article might be worth keeping after extensive cleanup and wikification. I will add edit tags. DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 16:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note - IP editors have inappropriately removed the AfD tag and the edit tags without comment. They have been restored but who knows if the editors will take the hint. DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If he's notable enough for the Louvre and the British Museum then he's notable enough for Wikipedia. They are the experts, after all. A few more sources:[1][2][3][4]. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Prominence through exhibitions and sufficient secondary sources. Ty 14:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep as per Phil Bridger.Edward321 (talk) 03:17, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.