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.
I don't understand Estonian, which the review seems to be written in, but as near as I can tell, the review is not about Mari, it's about an exhibition that she was in. Granted, I could be wrong, so anyone who knows Estonian should review it. Since she's apparently not the primary subject of the review, I must say Delete, since this renders the review to being not a source we can at all use. Beyond that, we need more info on her in the way of reliable sources that show notability. Also for the note on the WP:BLP issue, as per AFL's nom. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 22:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:N - no sources present to establish notability. Also WP:BLP demands that any uncited content on the biography of a living person be immediately removed, which in this case would result in blanking the article. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I checked out the web site of the Estonian Artists' Union. [1]. It appears to be a professional association of artists with over 900 members, presumably artists of a certain quality as applications require a CV and 3 letters of recommendation, but I hardly think that's an indication of notability in the Wikipedia sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voceditenore (talk • contribs)
Yes, they require three letters of recommendation and 2/3 support in voting ([2]) - and it is the main artists union in Estonia. I don't think notability can be asserted that way - and there appears to be no extensive coverage of her even in Estonian press, probably due her advanced age (almost all matches are simply mentions of her birthday). She was probably more notable during her heyday in 60s and 70s, that is why I support deletion now and re-creation of the article if more sources can be found. --Sander Säde13:59, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a member of the Writer's Guild of Australia, but sadly that doesn't get me an article on Wikipedia. The standard is not what profession you're in or what memberships you may have, but what you've actually achieved to earn the specific and extraordinary attention of your peers or some section of the public. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless this article can be significantly improved to establish notability and verify the facts in a BLP. I looked at the original references and the google translations. The fact that she is a member of the Estonian Artists' Union is not supported at by the reference given.[3] That article is about an entirely different person, Anu Raud, and Aakre is not mentioned in it at all. The second article [4] is not even a review. It merely announces a free exhibition in which she was one of three 12 artists. The announcement is a press release from the gallery (as can be seen from the bottom of the article). The mere fact that an article about her appears in the Estonian WP is no indication that she is notable. Voceditenore (talk) 12:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice and allow re-creation if notability is asserted and better sources provided. Right now the only inline source goes to an article which has no mention of Mari Aakre at all - so this is basically completely unsourced BLP. --Sander Säde13:03, 29 September 2009 (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.