Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Peirce

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Peirce (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Nō indication of notability. Article is basically promotional. PepperBeast (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. PepperBeast (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. PepperBeast (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I'm not finding anything to substantiate the notability of this photographer per WP WP:ARTIST nor WP:GNG criteria. If sources can be found, or museum collections, I'd be willing to change my !vote, but I'm not seeing it. The article does seem like a promotional effort. Netherzone (talk) 02:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is coverage and all but the main issue it lacks of reliable sources. Thus, the article doesn’t meet the WP:GNG guideline, to which most articles should follow. --Vaco98 (talk) 02:39, 17 March 2022 (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.