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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:13, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can Emed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Promotion of a person of limited note. Off2riorob (talk) 14:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Considering this artist has little information on the google and the internet, This article contains brief and trustable references about this artist. (Such verifiable references as; ntvmsnbc.com etc.). And this artist (Can Emed) is not have that fame as other great artists such as Picasso. And so the less number (9 Reference)of references maybe view as "balanced". And the article contains "not long" and "not exaggerated" informations about Can Emed. The article also contains balanced, verifiable informations that can be verified on the internet by an international-artists-organisations such as; UNESCO/AIAP/UPSD such is also a reference. The article contains 3 clean photograph, one is taken on the artist's exhibition-reception. And so, there is not an argument here such as this artist (Can Emed) is really living person. And so, I cannot clearly understand why this page is on "deletion process" I'm university degree class knowledge about especially art, history of art and contemporary art. Also I am the same person here. My purpose is for creating this article (Can Emed) about my self is trusting your independence. If any person who has a remarkable proffession on his/her work and knowned by internationally, can be freely opened an article about himself/herself. İf ---İf he uses balanced view, reliable sources, and verifiable references SUCH AS I DID on "Can Emed article". I dig on google and find nearly 9 trutable-reference on the internet. --If this is not view as; "resourcable", then there is not argument can stays here on the feet.. Becouse I still not understand the argument of the deletion process in "turned-on".

If any wise web-master here, ıf any wise editor here, PLEASE I NEED YOUR HELP, NOT DELETION WITHOUT AN EXPLANATION ! I NEED TECHNİCAL HELP IMMEDIATELY................ I still trust your independence, and international wisdom. Sincerely Yours; User; Johnaemeth (Can Emed) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnaemeth (talk • contribs) 20:50, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

mhahahah!!! :D "promotion of a person with limited note" it is interesting you know ? :D ..Becouse 1 weeks ago, I'm informed about "cleaning your long-notes". And now, it turns; "promotion of a person with limited note" mhahahahah!! ..Go ahead, FREELY, AND BRAVELY SAY; "I DO NOT WANT YOUR PAGE ON WIKI; ARTİST CAN EMED" ..I'm mature person dude you know, last week I broke up my ex-girl friend, and I am not in the mood now. Please be an adult, "I STILL DO NOT SEE THE DELETION ARGUMENT OF THAT PAGE" :pP :D ;) Sinrerely yours; " Off2riorob " :D I'm still laughing for good (reaaly) :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnaemeth (talk • contribs) (UTC)

Unfortunately I will continue to seek the informations for "Deletion-Nomination".. If ı cannot understand the specific-reasons and the specific-arguments of why the process still continues... Then I cannot solve the matter for good.. Yes? So, unfortunately I will continue to posting, becuse, simply I cannot understand... One weeks ago, there is another process that this article "needs to be cleared".. and one-weeks after there is deletion-process which I informed that the article is contains "short-information"... İs this an Irony or I is it a coincidence ?????????? I hope you can easily understand my reason for my questions to the wiki-team ............. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnaemeth (talk • contribs) 08:57, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: As Wikipedia:Unreferenced BLP Rescue did its work, I noticed that is one of the most common categories of self-created BLPs, and showing notability is often quite difficult -- because sourcing simply doesn't exist. For Mr. Emed, we have absolutely no google news hits (not even bare mentions), which is always the first bad sign. Then, since he is Turkish, I know I need to search the the archives of the top turkish newspapers (because they won't come up in Google). There is one 2002 bare mention of Emed participating in a young artists show [1] in Hürriyet. This is confirmed by the single bare mention of him in the 2003 "Turkish Art Yearbook" which is his only Google book hit [2].

I ask Mr. Emed if he can let us know of any other independent sources -- newspapers, magazine, etc. - to show that he meets Wikipedia's notability standards. Mr. Emed, please read Wikipedia:Notability to understand what I am talking about. You can read the same basic rule in Turkish at tr:Vikipedi:Kayda değerlik, that is how the Turkish wikipedia applies the same concept. As things look now, however, it appears this article is heading to deletion.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 11:50, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Are any of those exhibits or awards notable? WP:ARTIST Dream Focus 16:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The reference I found was to him simply being part of an exhibition, unfortunately, among a list of other artists. It verifies his existence as an artist in Turkey, I suppose, but no more.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 19:06, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom...Modernist (talk) 16:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 19:41, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as explained by the original nominator and everybody else associated with this article save the subject himself, who should read WP:UPANDCOMING. It's a shame, really, I kinda like what I've seen of his work and his influences. --Orangemike (talk) 17:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete / Userify fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:55, 11 October 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.