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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Artur Balder[edit]

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

Procedural listing following the outcome of a deletion review. The concern is that the subject of the article is not notable. Mkativerata (talk) 20:54, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - though his one documentary has some coverage by presumably reliable sources, there is zero significant coverage of the person. Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:CREATIVE. Deletion review was correct however that it is not a speedy case as there is a claim of notability.--96.22.106.146 (talk) 14:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the discovering of a disappeared neightborhood of Manhattan has weight enough to sustain the notability of Balder's work and contribution to the history of New York City and the Spanish immigration during and after the Spanish Civil War. It pass WP:GNG. The sources are as a matter of fact "realiable" and the coverage is obviously "significant", since all and the most important Spanish media talk directly and indirectly about the subject, or interview him. The sources are "independent of the subject or its affiliates". It pass WP:CREATIVE, read points 3 and 4, and the significance of its work as writer about the history of the Spanish american community of Manhattan "has won significant critical attention" and / or being "a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." All at the same time. Indeed, now there are enough international references of the filmmaker as a well known writer of children books and historical fiction for the last 8 years, and information about its translation into italian, nederlands, romanian and french. --Lolox76 (talk) 13:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The "find sources" for "images" does not match with Google results above expressed. See here--Lolox76 (talk) 13:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a very problematic article which needs to be rewritten and wikified, but the sources listed, including the Latin America Herald Tribune, the Hartford Courant, and El Pais indicate notability of the subject. (The same style problems can be found at the related article Little Spain.) --MelanieN (talk) 16:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:41, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While yes, the article is a bit of a mess, the sources offered[1][2] seem to confirm notability. As the article's issues can be corrected through regular editing, deletion is not required. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:38, 9 January 2011 (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.