Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erdal Kinaci

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. Consensus is for deletion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:23, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Erdal Kinaci (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Not sure how notable this guy is, most of the google search results I get are either Wikipedia mirrors or stuff for other people (such as a doctor) The only ref was to National Geographic, which had nothing to do with him! Wgolf (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the applicable references:

-- RM 01:37, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment-Thanks, I didn't et any of those when I tried to find info about the guy for some reason about 30 minutes ago oddly. I'll look over these to see if this guy is notable or not. Wgolf (talk) 01:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Google search with +"Erdal Kinaci" +"National Geographic" -- RM 01:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. As a photographer myself, being featured by NatGeo is a dream. It's clearly a highly notable event, but it's just that, an event. As per WP:BIO1E, it does not prove the notability of the photographer. An article on the contest might be more appropriate. The arrest would normally fail to WP:ROUTINE. However, the arrest was related to his photography. Combine the two, and suddenly you have a guy who is notable for photography from multiple independent sources for multiple events, and the 1E policies no longer apply. The fact that he is from another country that speaks another language and we still have multiple sources also works in his favor. My only concern is that there is very little material for a full article. -- RM 02:24, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as my searches are simply not finding anything noticeably convincing enough to suggest actually keeping and improving. SwisterTwister talk 05:37, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The photo may be notable, he is not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Unfortunately, he's not notable per WP:ARTIST and WP:GNG. I din't find any reliable sources confirming the notability. It's Delete. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:00, 24 April 2016 (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.