Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pierre-Alexis Dumas
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 keep. postdlf (talk) 22:48, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Pierre-Alexis Dumas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Very heavy COI, perhaps autobiographical. Clearly written to be very flattering to the subject, although doesn't seem to rise to the level of CSD G11. Very much is made of the subjects family connections, but obviously notability is not inherited. Could be notable, but seems rather dubious. If this closes as keep, at the very least the article needs a serious rewrite for POV. Safiel (talk) 04:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 09:23, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 09:23, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I just noticed this nestling between all the beauty queens and wannabe models. Dumas is the artistic director for an internationally renowned status brand, just as Lagerfeld is for Chanel, and Galliano used to be for Dior. This makes him extremely notable, with international coverage about him coming up on Google News. Yes, the article needs a major rewrite and fix, but he more than passes WP:GNG. The family argument - given that Hermès is very much a family-owned and oriented brand, much like Gucci and Versace - is not really an issue here. Mabalu (talk) 12:08, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley 00:21, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The article has issues, but the subject is definitely notable. Ohconfucius ping / poke 03:53, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Nice catch by Mabalu; subject certainly meets WP:GNG, e.g., [1]. The article itself is a mess though. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:55, 22 December 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.