Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AlexTorridZoneIglooHirka
- Del. Self-promotion of obscure artist. --Wik 15:25, Apr 17, 2004 (UTC)
- Agreed. Delete. Cribcage 15:50, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Vanity. Delete. Ashibaka ✎ 16:39, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Accurate information. Do not delete. Alex Hirka
- I dispute significance, not accuracy. Also, see below. Cribcage 22:28, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Accuracy is not proof of relevance, though only one self-serving vote for keeping is evidence of vanity. (guess who wrote the comment immediately above mine...) Postdlf 19:36 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Hard to tell whether this is vanity or an advertisement (or both). Either way, it belongs on his user page, not here. Rossami 01:58, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Belongs on user page. Ambivalenthysteria 02:34, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Delete: self promotion. Just delete it -- moving it to a user page would be an undeserved reward. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:59, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Keep, but needs substantial revision to make NPOV. --Daniel C. Boyer 13:15, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- It's a gray area, but I say Keep. There are references to Mr Zirka's work as an artist that apparently exist independantly. So he probably is a valid subject for an article. If so, there's no reason to deny him the opportunity to contribute to it. But NPOV review obviously should be done by third parties. MK 02:48, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I am quite a new at exploring and using Wikipedia. I have read some about how it works, have had some difficulty, and have obviously missed something. I have used this resource before, with great results, to find information. When I looked up "Mail Art" recently I discovered the page that was set up on the subject , with the link in place for my name in the list of artists at bottom - I was quite active and respected in the network - I did not put my name there - and then went and filled it in with information (all the information is true and accurate) about what I did as a mail-artist and what I am doing now. I am not quite sure what I could do differently. Is it just the tone that has made it be criticized as "vanity"? - that could certainly be adjusted. Hope I am okay in posting this question here. Sincerely, Alex Hirka obladida@adelphia.net
- Frankly, Mr. Hirka's tact and tone give me pause to rethink my vote to delete. One of his articles certainly must be deleted (or converted to a redirect)...but maybe we should reconsider deleting both. As a jazz writer, I might contribute a wonderful article about Richard Wyands. He's far from the most notable jazz pianist, but he has been active and influential. Exactly how notable must an artist be, to warrant inclusion (remembering that Wikipedia is not paper...)? And can anyone familiar with mail art attest to Mr. Hirka's work? Cribcage 06:48, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Edit history shows that the same person [1] added the Alex Hirka link [2] to mail art and wrote the Alex Hirka article, as well as spamming holiday with Alex Hirka's personal holiday. Given his lack of notoriety, I'm inclined to believe he was that person, contrary to his statement above ("I did not put my name there"). Tactful or tactless, it's still self promotion. Regards, Wile E. Heresiarch 21:01, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)