Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Lokiec

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.

Result Nomination Withdrawn (non-admin closure).-- Magioladitis (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Lokiec

Fails notability since June 2007. Article is orphan as well. Prod removed since a reference to the NYT implies that "he deserves an AfD at least" :) Magioladitis (talk) 20:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. —Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 21:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, in addition to the NYT review, there are several other sources listed here. Of the ones available online, only the NYT seems to provide substantial coverage of Lokiec, however. Overall, just enough to scrape by the notability requirements, I think. Jfire (talk) 21:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weakest possible keep. I'm not so sure about the bibliography on his gallery's website. They could just be simple listings. The NYT review is decidedly mixed, and five years old. But one old NYT review, however ambivalent, is just about enough to err on the side of keep.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 22:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete one mention in the NYT doesn't make you encyclopedia-worthy. Clubmarx (talk) 22:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ Keep Seems to have a decent amount of coverage, close to 2500 google hits (and yes I'm still keeping in mind WP:GOOGLE). That with the NYTimes also has me err on the side of "keep". --Banime (talk) 23:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After the new expansion I'm going to upgrade to full on keep. --Banime (talk) 17:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Since the above comments, I've expanded the article and added references. Some of these are short mentions of him, but there is a consistency over five years and he gets mentioned above the run-of-the-mill in international coverage. Ty 07:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Young artist with impressive attention, from not only the New York Times, seems worthwhile....Modernist (talk) 12:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw The article established notability. A great thanks Tyrenius for his effort to improve the article significantly. I hope my withdraw don't prevent editor from keep improving the article. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:19, 12 October 2008 (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.