Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean-Jacques Birgé (2nd nomination)

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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jean-Jacques Birgé

Unknown artist, no sources about its exhibitions and awards except his own website (drame.org), poor google hits. Auto promotionnal page, looks like curriculum vitae Nanax (talk) 08:29, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:08, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don 't understand what the nominator means by "unknown artist". Unknown to you? Why italics on "artist"? Not having heard of someone is not a reason for deletion. In any case, there seem to be some non-English sources, such as Le Monde, which is significant. Likewise, an interview on turbulance.org in English is an acceptable source. This artist seems to have been involved in a great deal of projects which easily establish notability per WP:BIO. The sources can be sorted out and not having many English sources is not a reason for deletion. The article needs a good editing (was it originally on the French wiki?). Maybe we could get some help translating the original article, but as it stands, this seems to easily pass the notability test. freshacconci talktalk 12:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He is not an artist in the VA sense, except as a filmmaker & I have adjusted the article for this. The French refs & links show plenty of independent coverage, though he was not, according to other sources, the main director of "Sarajevo: A Street Under Siege" - no doubt there were several. Needs better referencing, but notability seems clear. Johnbod (talk) 12:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems both notable and encyclopedic...Modernist (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly of sufficient notability. Kafka Liz (talk) 12:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the nominator correctly states that the page is promotional and that much of the information is not verified and implies that the page needs a complete re-write, the references in the article very clearly support notability by providing significant in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources. Drawn Some (talk) 14:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First off, this thing is a monstrosity and needs a major overhaul. However, unlike must promo-type pages this one seems to be about a notable person keep and give a good scrubbing. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 23:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per everyone but nominator. Is it Snowing yet? Edward321 (talk) 02:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on the basis of the sources & prizes. The list of works should be trimmed considerably. DGG (talk) 00:30, 14 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.