Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J. Corsentino

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. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 03:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

J. Corsentino

Article with no sources about an artist. The two books listed (one of which is primarily his, the other he is one of 168 artists in it) from my search of Worldcat only show up in three libraries. Sources exist showing that the person exists, but not as far as I can tell ones that establish notability enough for a Wikipedia article. DreamGuy (talk) 20:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nomination. No evidence of notability, slim verification of claims in article, plenty of time for original editors or others to provide documentation. TheMindsEye (talk) 02:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No assertion of notability apart from unsourced "is well known" claim. Having photographs published in articles and two books does not make a photographer notable. Fails WP:BIO. Johnuniq (talk) 03:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - subject fails WP:BIO. Slim coverage outside self-published or commercial sources such as http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/236723/interviews_with_fantasy_artist_j_corsentino.html (which is not intellectually independent and triggered the WP spam blacklist) is not sufficient to establish notability. Enki H. (talk) 13:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom...Modernist (talk) 04:14, 9 June 2009 (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.