Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas Fakis

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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Fakis

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

Primary sources. No major achievements/awards - Does not meet WP:ARTIST. CASSIOPEIA (talk) 18:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. ——Chalk19 (talk) 07:00, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedians,

the section A7 forsees the deletion of an article about a real person that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, therefore widely known, even in a specific demographic group, for instance: classic Italian super-mini car collectors. The article in question regards Andreas Fakis, the lead curator of the biennial Public Art Festival and the founder of the independent cultural foundation Studio 4. Andreas Fakis is perhaps the only curator in Greece that specialises in the public art genre, so the deletion of his page would not only be outside the criteria of the section A7, but could "pose in question" the articles of other well-respected curators that have not achieved a "museum-director" status, within and beyond Greece. The information I have provided is not backed only by web articles, but also by conferences that have been recorded, tv and radio interviews, newspaper articles and some web articles. Since wikipedia is such a collective place, I would find it kind enough if articles like this were not nominated for deletion, but instead were improved by the community according to wikipedia's standards, for instance non-web sources could be a good fit for this article.

FAA4891 (talk) 21:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content is based on coverage of subject in reliable independent sources. I'm not seeing any for this subject. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nomination. Not in depth coverage of his work; mostly listings, press releases, and self-presentations. ——Chalk19 (talk) 06:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Notability might exist if the author sought to develop the article further. But lacks in-depth coverage as it stands nowNottoohackneyed (talk) 05:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nothing in the article is even close to an independent, reliable source.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:55, 13 January 2018 (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.