- 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 keep. SarahStierch (talk) 06:13, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Depiction of women artists in art history
- Depiction of women artists in art history (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)
Per WP:NOTESSAY. If there's a notable topic worth salvaging here, Women in art history is probably a better way of putting it. --BDD (talk) 16:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. --BDD (talk) 16:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Essay lacking any citations. As the nominator says, some of this might be salvageable as material in a general article on women as artists, but without citations it's hard to say what is of merit here. Mangoe (talk) 17:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep needs work but enormous potential for improvement...Modernist (talk) 18:18, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or at least merge back to Women artists, which it was split out from. All reads like standard art history course content. Women in art history would be female art historians, surely? Women artists in art history maybe or Coverage of women artists in art history? Johnbod (talk) 14:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and continue to develop--this is an important subject for the encyclopedia to cover well. --Jgmikulay (talk) 17:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Modernist, Johnbod, and Jgmikulay. Great potential here, per WP:BEFORE. See also past precedent at such cases as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crisis of the Roman Republic. Bearian (talk) 21:10, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I'm not sure what this article is about. Is the word "depiction" in the title referring to visual depiction? Is the title alternatively "Depiction of women artists in art"? Is this an examination of how art history has treated women artists? In that case it is an examination of the verbal treatment of female artists. Bus stop (talk) 11:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- While I'm unsure what is article is about, I would like to add this photograph to it. Perhaps the title of this article needs to be changed? Bus stop (talk) 11:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I added the image as well as 2 feminist templates and a reference section. The article needs text, referencing and work - the potential is an important addition to the visual arts on wikipedia...Modernist (talk) 17:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I think it is a good image. The subject matter here and that image make a good match. Bus stop (talk) 02:26, 16 August 2012 (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.