Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ana Novella

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. Fails to meet our artist inclusion guidelines, but more importantly, GNG. Thanks everyone for contributing and assuming good faith! Missvain (talk) 15:43, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ana Novella

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

completely (never) sourced article, likely paid/autobio and I can't find any sources to support it's inclusion. Praxidicae (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 January 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a quick search turned up nothing. I trimmed the large sections of unsourced material. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:45, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the list of exhibitions so that other AfD reviewers can assess the subject's notability. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:04, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I wonder if they are true or not, since there are no sources?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:06, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to tag them as lacking sources, although they're covered by the -- inaccurate -- tag atop the article, and some at least seem to be in the subject's CV, for what that's worth. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:10, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. I removed it because none of the claims are verified, and because they are exceedingly vague (group, solo?). In any case, items like "Museum of Modern Art Rental Gallery, San Francisco, U.S.A." are not going to help much.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:12, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I found one source, for the fact that she did some paintings for the Maritime Pet Museum. Added.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:36, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete Voicing ThatMontrealIP. A private BEFORE I conducted shows no evidence of true notability.Celestina007 (talk) 00:13, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've just been rewriting the article because I could find sources about her/her art. Kingsif (talk) 00:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

yes, and the Artepoli source you added is a magazine that offers paid critical reviews for 66 euros: "ARTEPOLI offers: The possibility of presenting a criticism, review or article about his work (maximum 800 words) for printing with at least 2 photographs of his paintings (or fragment, in the case of one of them, if it is beneficial for design). The article would occupy double page. If the text is smaller (600 words, for example) there is an opportunity to incorporate a third work or to increase its size."ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:35, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removed, thanks! Kingsif (talk) 00:43, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Subject of this article does not meet WP:NARTIST nor GNG; no sigcov in RS. Netherzone (talk) 03:31, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - zero coverage in any reliable sources. The sources are terrible. Ping me if you find anything we can vet. Bearian (talk) 20:34, 22 January 2020 (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.