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. Sources were added now satisfies WP:N, good save. (non-admin closure) Tofutwitch11 ^(TALK) 14:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vito Schnabel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log  • AfD statistics)

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

Claim to fame is he has a famous dad and dates a model. Other than those two links, he does not have an ounce of notability warranting his own encyclopedia article. Does not pass WP:N. --Endlessdan (talk) 16:41, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete - no notability (per WP:NOTINHERITED [dad] and WP:NOTCONTAGIOUS [date]); no assertion of notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:49, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete - per A7, so tagged. Someone delete and snow close this! ukexpat (talk) 16:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Did nobody think of looking to see if he may actually be notable? Evening Standard, Vanity Fair, New York Times, The Independent, New York Sun, New York Observer, New York Observer.--Michig (talk) 07:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I still fail to see how these links prove he is notable. All these links prove that he either was in fact the son of a famous artist or that he is in the art industry. None of these facts are being disputed. I looked over WP:ARTIST and he does not meet one of the several criterias to meet notability.--Endlessdan (talk) 03:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He is not an artist and there is no claim that he is, so looking at WP:ARTIST isn't likely to help. Try WP:GNG.--Michig (talk) 07:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But this goes back to the links provided. It's either pertaining to his famous father or the fact that he is involved in the art world. There are thousands of people in his profession - what makes him more notable than the others (other than his inherited fame)? --Endlessdan (talk) 15:06, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that he has been written about because of his work in the art industry. Did you read WP:GNG? Those articles are about him. It's not surprising that they mention who his father is, but there's no reason to assume that all those people have only written about him because of who his father is.--Michig (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Michig's sources. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:27, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- I concur. Wikipedia can definitely be more resourceful about the art world: Why should only rich socialites have access to such information?--Aichikawa (talk) 18:32, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
• Keep per Michig. But article needs amending to include at least some of the sources and his role as "art market prodigy". Wwwhatsup (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2010 (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.