Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Mason
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Spartaz Humbug! 03:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Jennifer Mason (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- I googled "Jennifer Mason" photographer Auckland and went to about the 7th or 8th page of results. This did result in more hits than just her website (event listings excluded):
- * listing for 2009 Auckland Festival of Photography
- * art magazine review of above, which was her first solo exhibition
- * runner up for a New Zealand national award in 2009
- * shortlisted for New Zealand national award in 2008
- * online artists forum reviews a 2010 exhibit
- * art magazine mentions her when she won a young artists award in 2002
- The notability criteria Wikipedia:Bio#Creative_professionals say she should be "regarded as important by peers", "originating a significant new concept", "created a major body of work that is the subject of a book, film, or multiple reviews", "been a substantial part of a significant exhibition", "won significant critical attention".
- I don't see how any of these apply from the sources I could find.
- I understand that the deletion criteria are complicated and I may not have this right. I am happy for the experts to take it from here. The reason I'm going through the process was I came here to see if I could fix the orphan tag, but it's hard to know what other pages should point to this one. She's not a well-known exemplar of a particular technique and does not seem well-known enough to link from articles such as Auckland. Seeing that, I wondered if the article should be part of an encyclopedia at all. 207.134.250.140 (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete- Self-promotional. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete. Borderline at best. I know that "I've never heard of her" is a poor reason to give for deletion, but as a professional New Zealand arts reviewer, I would have expected to hear of her if she had reached notability standard - and none of the sources given seem to indicate that she has (yet, at least). If she had won either of those awards, I would !vote differently, but as a runner-up or finalist, no. Grutness...wha? 21:30, 24 December 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.