Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guy Jocelyn Reid

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. (non-admin closure) J 947 21:58, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Jocelyn Reid

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

The notability of this article's subject has not been justified with any credible references or citations. TopCipher (talk) 18:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Needs a cleanup, however articles like this point to notability as do the ten or so book references I saw in Google books. Many of the article refs are poor quality, however I think it should not be too hard to replace these with better refs. Web searches for "guy Joelyn Reid" turn up nothing-- you have to search for "Guy Reid" sculptor. 104.163.140.193 (talk) 11:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an article in the New Statesman about a controversial nude sculpture of Joseph and Mary that he did for a church. 104.163.140.193 (talk) 11:54, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The New Statesman article is pretty significant. If you look at his website under reviews there is a list of reviews and public commissions. Given the scope of his commissions, including museum works, and the coverage that he's received, this passes WP:GNG. freshacconci talk to me 01:58, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand DarjeelingTea (talk) 17:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as per above.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:25, 10 March 2017 (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.