Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Rowden

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. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 14:41, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Rowden

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

This article has the hallmark of WP:SELFPROMOTE - all the major edits have been made by the same editor James Monk. A Google search of the subject reveals a number of self-promotional links and very few other links. There are no significant links back to him other than Waverley Art Prize which is an article that was created by the same editor. This suggests that James monk is either Rowden himself, or somebody close to Rowden. Rowden certainly does not meet the criteria specified in WP:ARTIST Martinvl (talk) 08:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:ARTIST. Ceoil (talk) 13:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ceoil.--John (talk) 13:25, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article doesn't suggest sufficient notability and a search for sources failed to find anything significant. --Michig (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2012 (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.