Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts
![]() | Points of interest related to Visual arts on Wikipedia: Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – Style |
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:
- Edit this page 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.
- 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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Visual arts. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
- 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.
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/Replacement_filing_cabinet.svg/32px-Replacement_filing_cabinet.svg.png)
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
edit- Kiosko (Hendrix) (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 GNG. One of the 2 sources provided is a primary source. LibStar (talk) 01:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Mexico. LibStar (talk) 01:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I de-stubbed it. It might become a good article if written correctly. (CC) Tbhotch™ 06:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per GNG, and thanks to User:Tbhotch for expanding the article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 06:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Amadour (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:NSINGER, WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. Note tag added. Present coverage all PR. Introducing Amadour, EP being released soon. scope_creepTalk 16:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Bands and musicians, Visual arts, and Nevada. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Dani Brubaker (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)
Notablity not established; article appears to be wp:promo. Her name does appear in published sources but only in captions for her photography. The one piece of writing I found about her was about winning an honorable mention on pr.com, which is just a press release, not a published article. Yuchitown (talk) 17:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - I saw this a few days ago while patrolling the NPP feed, and questioned the notability. She is a working commercial photographer who makes some very nice photographs, however she not a notable photographer per WP criteria for WP:NARTIST nor the general notability guideline. She lived in two houses that have been written about, and she took some controversial photographs of a young girl. The sourcing consists of her own website, some blogs or blog-like coverage mostly about the young girl, or about her two houses. Other sources include a self-published Lulu "book", and photo caption mentions. This is not the type of in-depth significant coverage needed for an encyclopedia article; she does not have the type of track record that we normally see for a notable photographer. The article seems to be WP:PROMO. Netherzone (talk) 18:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Photography, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Architecture, and California. Netherzone (talk) 20:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Source analysis does not show notability. I am not finding any better sources on the internet. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 22:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Thank you for the feedback. I found the book and it's not a self-published. It appears to be someone who is inspired by her work. I have also found sources related to photos she took of Britney Spears in 2009. I have not added the sources yet as I am still reading over them as some appear to be contentious, so I am being cautious as what is sourced. I am not related in any form to the artist, so I can attest it is not a WP:PROMO as suggested. This article is within the scope of WP:VISUALARTS; WP:NEWMEXICO; along with several others. I would kindly ask you to reconsider and assist me with the page. I am new to Wiki editing, so would this better suited for WP:DRAFT?
- Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 23:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Today articles are about Brubaker allegedly selling photos of Spear's children, later revealed by the same source, Article on Today.comSpears sold the photos herself during her public meltdown. The article is about Brubaker. Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 12:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Lulu.com book is self published by the person who wrote it - Lulu is a self-publishing platform, not a reliable publishing house. Netherzone (talk) 23:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Understood. Thank you for clarifying. Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 01:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: The PR.com article seems to be all there is; I don't find anything else. Not listed in the Getty ULAN [1], so delete for a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 00:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- OK to delete for now, but concur with earlier post that Dani Brubaker's biggest claim to fame in terms of secondary coverage is related to photographs she took of Britney Spears in 2007. At first, it was rumored that Dani had put the photos up for sale against Britney's wishes as explained in this article on Today.com, but a later article in the same publication, "Britney is her own best publicist", claimed that Britney herself had been behind the sale of the "beautiful" photographs all along. In the end, it seems like a non-story and hardly seems like the main thing Dani Brubaker would want to be known for (particularly since along the way, it was suggested that Britney was planning to file a lawsuit against her). A further point is that it's not just photo credits; Brubaker also appears to have written at least one article in 2018 for Marie Claire. She is also mentioned in passing in this article, "Kids' Photography, Coming of Age" in Photo District News. All in all, it's just not quite enough to satisfy Wikipedia criteria for notability at this time. That said, given her strong portfolio as a celebrity photographer, it would not be surprising if Dani Brubaker does receive coverage about her life and work in the future; and if this coverage is in independent, reliable secondary sources (please see WP:RELIABLESOURCES), it would help satisfy the Wikipedia criteria for notability (please see WP:GNG). (And if #TeamDani is reading this, worth having a read of WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY as well.) Cielquiparle (talk) 03:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Instead of deleting would you consider WP:NOTJUSTYET Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 12:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- If you follow that link, it goes to Wikipedia:Too soon. Please read it. Such articles are deleted, but if/when the subject becomes more notable in real life a new article could be created in the future. As Cielquiparle recommends, please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. All these links explain Wikipedia's policies. Yuchitown (talk) 13:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Coolhandluke2022, I've twice now had to move your comments because they either split another editors comment, or because it was threaded incorrectly. Please be mindful of this in the future. Thanks, Netherzone (talk) 19:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Instead of deleting would you consider WP:NOTJUSTYET Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 12:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nick Robinson (paperfolder) (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)
No reliable secondary sources. External links section points to a couple interviews, but just interviews can’t uphold an entire article. This deletion discussion is alongside Typhoon Saturday. This page was created by an IP address (IP is coincidentally is in the same place Nick Robinson is from), and was later edited by accounts named "Iamnickrobinson" and "Robinnick" a.k.a the most obvious WP:COI violation of the decade. Roasted (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Bands and musicians. Roasted (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - This promotional article (seems like it is mostly an autobiographic creation) on an artist does not meet notability criteria WP:NARTIST nor WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 17:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 17:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Need more sources and sections are unsourced. Xegma(talk) 17:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Löschen: I can't find enough coverage about this person; [2] was the best I could bring up. Tried French sources as well as he's lectured in France, nothing... Oaktree b (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Can't find any book reviews, nothing in the Getty ULAN [3], so doesn't seem to pass artist or author notability either. Oaktree b (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think this can be salvaged as notable. Many books on origami and he is listed as a contributor to the online Encyclopædia Britannica . Heavy online presence as an origami teacher. I hope to take a longer look at this in the next couple a days. I ran out of steam after creating (losing and the recreating) the source analysis for Gar Waterman. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment There is a review of his solo album by Jazz Journal. toweli (talk) 08:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
MergeRedirect into List of origamists. I don't think a notable case can be made for jazz work. I cannot find reliable sourcing (reviews or works in collections) for a stand alone article. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- Delete per WP:MILL. He’s been the president of a club with 700 members. He had a jazz album that one person reviewed. He’s a nice guy. Bearian (talk) 01:35, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Leaning delete. Have added a reference, but it doesn't take him near notability. Rather surprised not to find book reviews to consider him under WP:NWRITER, but as none of us can find them I think it's just not there. Tacyarg (talk) 08:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Prue Bishop (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)
This semi-promotional biography of an artist who trademarked her technique for, "sculptural watercolors" does not seem to meet notability requirements for WP:GNG nor for WP:NARTIST. She did not invent sculptural watercolor, she only trademarked her own specific method. An online WP:BEFORE search only found primary sources, many links to her own website, a couple Wordpress blogs, social media and links to a few things she has written. Thinking she might qualify as a scholar/academic, I searched for her h-index on Google Scholar and Scopus (zero); she has written a few articles on the artist JMW Turner, but they don't seem to be cited frequently enough to meet ACADEMIC. The current article sourcing is either primary, or unverifiable (other than her own website and her trademark). Unfortunately, as much as I dislike seeing articles on women artists deleted, I'm bringing it here for the community to decide the outcome. Netherzone (talk) 15:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Artists, Businesspeople, Women, Visual arts, and United Kingdom. Netherzone (talk) 15:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete This artist does not meet WP:NARTIST. She has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. Seems more like WP:PROMO --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete An article for Prudence Mary Bishop by this same editor was rejected at AfC in 2018 as not showing notability. This is a second try, but I do not find any sources about her except her own web site. Many of the sources cited here are not about her but link to organizations that are mentioned in the article. Lamona (talk) 03:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:V. She might be a wonderful person, a creative artist, and all that, but unless we can verify basic facts about her, there’s only original research. Bearian (talk) 01:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Zoë Paul (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. No awards or recognition. Created by a single purpose editor so possible promo. Sources provided merely confirm where she has exhibited and not SIGCOV. This source seems to be the only indepth coverage. LibStar (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Visual arts, South Africa, and Greece. LibStar (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Found some additional WP:RS coverage of Paul: Frieze magazine, The Design Edit, Vice (referenced in the article but needs to be archived), StudioInternational (referenced above)
- Keep: there are several articles in art magazines about her work and its significance. I added one today that I found. I think she meets criteria 2, 3, and 4d of WP:Artist. Nnev66 (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Please review article improvements.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)