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. Courcelles (talk) 04:50, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandre Gurita (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)

The sources don't stand up to scrutiny: auction page, blog post, cruft, dead link, job application, news brief.

Also, seriously? "His art works are immaterial, consisting of experiences and human networks embedded in real life, such as getting married in 2009 as his graduation art submission." - Biruitorul ^Talk 04:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Vanity cruft, sub-CV level, embarrassingly sourced. Dahn (talk) 06:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: you're right; upon closer inspection he seems to fail both WP:ARTIST and WP:GNG. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 20:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In concrete terms, which (if any) of the WP:ARTIST criteria do you believe this individual passes, and what indication do you have that he has been the subject of (per WP:BASIC) "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject"? Pointing to a search result that yields a half-dozen snippets of probably unquotable text cannot substitute for actual, quotable coverage. - Biruitorul ^Talk 20:09, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:46, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:46, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:46, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There is actually one solid ref in the article: the one published in L'Express about his marriage project. I would not say he is a fake. A few of his projects are artistically interesting. The problem is that they rest upon practices that are in essence deceptive. For example, it seems that the famous French artist Daniel Buren is suing one of the article subject's projects, a rejuvenation/fake copy of the IHEAP school. See Artnews article.^[1] So while there might be minimal notability to his projects, I think that including and supporting them in WP is a confusing proposition for the regualr reader. Very diffcult to find good quality refs when the basis of the artistic practice is deception!New Media Theorist (talk) 20:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the search engines do not show anything which would qualify this artist under notability guidelines. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:18, 2 September 2015 (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.