This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Visual arts. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Visual arts|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Visual arts.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
watch |
For Visual arts listings only:
- A simple tag to put on AfD discussions as an alternative to the coding given above under "tag an AFD" is:
- {{subst:LVD}}
- It displays exactly the same message, but is easier to remember.
See also:
Visual arts
Hell, etc. (exhibition)
- Hell, etc. (exhibition) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. The article presently only links to fan webpages, with the exception of one brief article in Greek. toweli (talk) 11:40, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Events, and Greece. toweli (talk) 11:40, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge : to the art section of his main article [1], I can't find coverage outside of the links given, already in the article. Oaktree b (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Pilgrimage (demoparty)
- Pilgrimage (demoparty) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. The only thing I found was this webpage (not article) on The Salt Lake Tribune's website. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Video games, Visual arts, Events, Computing, United States of America, and Utah. toweli (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
SUPERM
- SUPERM (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability concerns; no reliable sources; possible original research BoraVoro (talk) 07:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Organizations, Politics, Europe, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Reasons to Be Cheerful (book)
- Reasons to Be Cheerful (book) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Mainly Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV , I had trouble finding sources for this article. GoodHue291 (talk) 23:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I can only find reviews of a book with the same title by Nina Stibbe, unrelated to this book. I don't see notability for this book. Oaktree b (talk) 23:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Visual arts, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Covered in the New York Times, The Independent (via ProQuest), Eye Magazine and Design Oberserver. Not sure about the reliability of the last one, but the author seems qualified enough. Sufficient coverage to meet WP:NBOOK. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 03:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Could be excellent sources, but it's still hasn't been added onto the article. GoodHue291 (talk) 22:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @GoodHue291: I've added them to the article, but for future reference, whether they're in the article or not has no impact on notability. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 23:20, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Could be excellent sources, but it's still hasn't been added onto the article. GoodHue291 (talk) 22:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The New York Times source is very strong. The Eye Magazine is also good. Toughpigs (talk) 03:26, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, per above listing of sources (please do well-detailed and extensive "before" searches if AfD is to be a thing). Randy Kryn (talk) 08:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Dani Cavallaro
- Dani Cavallaro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I cannot find anything on this author in both print and online sources despite them writing 28 books. I cannot confirm even the most basic of biographical information (age, country, etc), nor even whether this is even a real person. What if this is simply a collection of authors who publish under this name? I cannot find a single newspaper article on this person, or any kind of faculty biography attached to any kind of institution. There is a short overview that lacks any biographical information on one of her publisher websites. I cannot confirm whether this person is an academic or has any kind of academic background.
Doing online searches, you find people spending years asking the exact same questions and not coming up with anything definitive:
https://www.animemangastudies.com/2014/03/19/who-is-dani-cavallaro-part-1/
https://www.animemangastudies.com/2014/03/21/who-is-dani-cavallaro-part-2/
In principle, her works could be used as sources for Wikipedia (not every author is notable enough to have their own page). There are a handful of academic reviews of her books but this is simply not enough. Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as article creator. I understand the concerns you're raising in your nomination, but they seem to be primarily concerns about the subject herself, which is a separate discussion from whether the subject merits a Wikipedia article. If your argument is that Cavallaro does not qualify for assessment under the academic notability guideline, note that she also meets criteria 1 and 3 of the creative professionals guideline: her Google Scholar results indicate that her work is widely cited, some of them having hundreds of citations, her work has been the subject of plentiful reviews in addition to the ones already present in the article, and physical copies of her works seem to be widespread, with this book and this book being available in hundreds of libraries. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- She fails literally every single criteria for the academic notability guideline (and rather badly I might add). She's made zero impact in her field, and merely spams out a lot of very low quality books that get trashed in reviews or cited in other low quality scholarship. She does not publish in any peer reviewed journal at all, and does not hold any position in any unviersity or academic setting, and does not go to any conferences (or even fan conventions). In the end, I can't even prove she's a real person and not 3 teenagers in a trench coat. The article will be permanent stub status simply because there's no sources and likely never will be. Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not certain whether the academic guideline applies in this case, but that's pretty irrelevant as I've already demonstrated how she passes the guideline for creative professionals. Again, none of the concerns you're raising here are relevant to the question of whether Cavallaro merits an article. A person does not need to have a public image or appear at events in order to be notable. Even if you think Cavallaro might be "
3 teenagers in a trench coat
", that isn't a reason to delete the article. Should William Shakespeare's article be deleted just because the authenticity of his work has been questioned for hundreds of years? Yes, that's a somewhat hyperbolic comparison, but quite to the point — I haven't seen that claim presented anywhere other than a single blog post, and I regard it as a fringe theory. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)- There is actual proof Shakespeare existed beyond people saying he wrote some works at least. What is there to say about somebody with no known personal details or expertise? XeCyranium (talk) 00:03, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, bringing up the Shakespeare thing was probably unnecessary, but I believe the point stands. None of Wikipedia's notability guidelines require verification of any personal details. In most cases, what's important is that the subject receives significant coverage in reliable sources; authors get slightly more leeway with the consideration of their works and how widely cited they are. Cavallaro meets both of those thresholds. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- There is actual proof Shakespeare existed beyond people saying he wrote some works at least. What is there to say about somebody with no known personal details or expertise? XeCyranium (talk) 00:03, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not certain whether the academic guideline applies in this case, but that's pretty irrelevant as I've already demonstrated how she passes the guideline for creative professionals. Again, none of the concerns you're raising here are relevant to the question of whether Cavallaro merits an article. A person does not need to have a public image or appear at events in order to be notable. Even if you think Cavallaro might be "
- She fails literally every single criteria for the academic notability guideline (and rather badly I might add). She's made zero impact in her field, and merely spams out a lot of very low quality books that get trashed in reviews or cited in other low quality scholarship. She does not publish in any peer reviewed journal at all, and does not hold any position in any unviersity or academic setting, and does not go to any conferences (or even fan conventions). In the end, I can't even prove she's a real person and not 3 teenagers in a trench coat. The article will be permanent stub status simply because there's no sources and likely never will be. Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Plenty of books/papers written by her, nothing about her. I don't find much of anything outside of books she's written. No coverage, no critical reviews of her works, unsure about scholarly notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)- @Oaktree b: Did you click the links I provided in my comment above? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes I did. The site is listed as a RS [2], but we need more than two articles from the same site to establish notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm confused. I'm not referring to the nomination but to my comment, where I showed her work has been widely cited and reviewed. Also, I will note that Anime and Manga Studies is likely not reliable as a whole, being a self-published source; the WikiProject only recommends a single page of references as a starting point for further research. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes I did. The site is listed as a RS [2], but we need more than two articles from the same site to establish notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Oaktree b: Did you click the links I provided in my comment above? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Visual arts, Anime and manga, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The Jstor link provided above shows ample reviews of her written works, easily passing AUTHOR notability. Oaktree b (talk) 13:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Commment: Since the author's reliability has come up here, notifying of a Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussion about this author. The discussion can be found here: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Dani Cavallaro. Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 17:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Reliability aside, her works have been reviewed enough for notability as an author. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Very Important Party
- Very Important Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Saturne Party
- Saturne Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Light and Space Contemporary
- Light and Space Contemporary (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Could not find reliable sources online, except for some (including sources used in this article) having short mentions on this subject. Sanglahi86 (talk) 08:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Museums and libraries, and Philippines. Sanglahi86 (talk) 08:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
May Gilbert
- May Gilbert (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not meet any of the criteria for WP:ARTIST. Only 1 article links to this. LibStar (talk) 14:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, Visual arts, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 14:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete The article has no reliable sources and is essentially an orphan with no article linking to it. This evidence suggests the article does not fall on the notability side. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 15:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Her work is in the collections of the Museum of New Zealand and the Christchurch Art Gallery. TheSwamphen (talk) 23:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Would pass artist notability for being in the collections of two museums as shown, but there is a lack of any kind of sourcing... I don't see books, Jstor, Gscholar or a Getty ULAN listing. Even a .nz websearch doesn't turn up much of anything. Oaktree b (talk) 15:31, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Bronwyn Holloway-Smith
- Bronwyn Holloway-Smith (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ARTIST and WP:AUTHOR. Most of the sources are primary. LibStar (talk) 19:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Visual arts, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 19:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Delete due to lack of secondary sourcing. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 03:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete because the sources do not establish notability as per WP:ARTIST. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 08:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the article needs some work but the subject is definitely notable. TheSwamphen (talk) 10:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I went through all of the sources, and don't see how this could meet WP:ARTIST at this time. Elspea756 (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Independent sigcov from 2018 in RNZ, Stuff. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 01:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per coverage mentioned by Hameltion. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep in line with WP:ARTIST bullets #3, #4, and even #2:
- "Ghosts in the form of gifts" is the subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews (ref1, ref2)
- "Pioneer City" has won significant critical attention by winning the National Contemporary Art Award (ref1, ref2)
- She is known for her 3D-printing techniques, using the medium to reproduce lost items ("Ghosts in the form of gifts")
- CaptainAngus (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Policies and WP's and MOS aside, how can "we" not keep the page of someone who created the title "Ghosts in the form of gifts". Randy Kryn (talk) 03:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep Cleanup needed, new refs indicate that greater notability can be established. Right now, it's borderline from what I can ascertain. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep As well as being an artist and author, Holloway-Smith has also been raising awareness of our 20th century public art as co-director of Public Art Heritage Aotearoa New Zealand supported by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage. I've edited the article to make this aspect of Holloway-Smith's work more visible. In my view, the work across a number of fields is enough to keep. Arnhemcr (talk) 22:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)