- 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The result was withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Manon (artist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I am unable to find any indication that this artist has made a notable impact on the art world, and there seems to be very few quality sources. An old talk page post also suggests the possibility of a copyright violation. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 01:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 01:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - Notable, passes
WP:GNG and
WP:NARTIST. There's tons of press on her in reliable sources (even tho these are not in the WP article, but AfD is not clean up). Also has work in numerous collections, awards, decades of exhibitions. Searching in German instead of English helps to find these. Not sure why this was nominated, other than the fact that the article needs clean up and the addition of citations.
Netherzone (
talk)
02:13, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Netherzone: Could you post some here so I take a look. I speak enough German to understand them. Thanks,
Oiyarbepsy (
talk)
03:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
-
Oiyarbepsy, I'm surprised you didn't find anything in a BEFORE search, but you can start here:
[1] there are lots of scanned in-depth articles on her that are verifiable SIGCOV in RS - just click on the pink links or watch the slideshow of articles, if you don't feel like searching.
Netherzone (
talk)
03:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hmm, a lot of WP:ROUTINE in there, which is to be expected on her self-promotional website, but I think there are some sources that are usable in there. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 03:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
-
Oiyarbepsy, I'm surprised you didn't find anything in a BEFORE search, but you can start here:
[1] there are lots of scanned in-depth articles on her that are verifiable SIGCOV in RS - just click on the pink links or watch the slideshow of articles, if you don't feel like searching.
Netherzone (
talk)
03:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Netherzone: Could you post some here so I take a look. I speak enough German to understand them. Thanks,
Oiyarbepsy (
talk)
03:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Oiyarbepsy: When I looked at that link, there are something like four or five hundred sources on that page; I stopped counting at 132 articles. Saying that it's routine coverage is ridiculous. There are literally too many instances of in-depth coverage to mention or count. There is a gigantic, tsunami-size preponderance of in-depth coverage. The artist is not engaging in any self-promotion, they are just listing all the people who have written about them. You would be best to withdraw this nomination, as her notability is not in question in the least. Take chances of this being deleted are so low that they are probably not measurable using modern technologies. ---
Possibly (
talk)
04:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @ Possibly:I wasn't saying that good in-depth sources don't exist, just that a lot of the ones listed are routine, and it will be a whole lot of work to sort thru what is and isn't. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Oiyarbepsy: When I looked at that link, there are something like four or five hundred sources on that page; I stopped counting at 132 articles. Saying that it's routine coverage is ridiculous. There are literally too many instances of in-depth coverage to mention or count. There is a gigantic, tsunami-size preponderance of in-depth coverage. The artist is not engaging in any self-promotion, they are just listing all the people who have written about them. You would be best to withdraw this nomination, as her notability is not in question in the least. Take chances of this being deleted are so low that they are probably not measurable using modern technologies. ---
Possibly (
talk)
04:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Keep sources are not easy to find in a Google search, given the one-word name, but I have added four high-quality sources. It is pretty obvious from this and the above discussion that she is notable. The article was in atrocious condition. I trimmed it and formatted it a bit, but it still needs a lot of work. --- Possibly ( talk) 04:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Manon (artist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I am unable to find any indication that this artist has made a notable impact on the art world, and there seems to be very few quality sources. An old talk page post also suggests the possibility of a copyright violation. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 01:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 01:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - Notable, passes
WP:GNG and
WP:NARTIST. There's tons of press on her in reliable sources (even tho these are not in the WP article, but AfD is not clean up). Also has work in numerous collections, awards, decades of exhibitions. Searching in German instead of English helps to find these. Not sure why this was nominated, other than the fact that the article needs clean up and the addition of citations.
Netherzone (
talk)
02:13, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Netherzone: Could you post some here so I take a look. I speak enough German to understand them. Thanks,
Oiyarbepsy (
talk)
03:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
-
Oiyarbepsy, I'm surprised you didn't find anything in a BEFORE search, but you can start here:
[1] there are lots of scanned in-depth articles on her that are verifiable SIGCOV in RS - just click on the pink links or watch the slideshow of articles, if you don't feel like searching.
Netherzone (
talk)
03:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hmm, a lot of WP:ROUTINE in there, which is to be expected on her self-promotional website, but I think there are some sources that are usable in there. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 03:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
-
Oiyarbepsy, I'm surprised you didn't find anything in a BEFORE search, but you can start here:
[1] there are lots of scanned in-depth articles on her that are verifiable SIGCOV in RS - just click on the pink links or watch the slideshow of articles, if you don't feel like searching.
Netherzone (
talk)
03:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Netherzone: Could you post some here so I take a look. I speak enough German to understand them. Thanks,
Oiyarbepsy (
talk)
03:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Oiyarbepsy: When I looked at that link, there are something like four or five hundred sources on that page; I stopped counting at 132 articles. Saying that it's routine coverage is ridiculous. There are literally too many instances of in-depth coverage to mention or count. There is a gigantic, tsunami-size preponderance of in-depth coverage. The artist is not engaging in any self-promotion, they are just listing all the people who have written about them. You would be best to withdraw this nomination, as her notability is not in question in the least. Take chances of this being deleted are so low that they are probably not measurable using modern technologies. ---
Possibly (
talk)
04:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @ Possibly:I wasn't saying that good in-depth sources don't exist, just that a lot of the ones listed are routine, and it will be a whole lot of work to sort thru what is and isn't. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- @
Oiyarbepsy: When I looked at that link, there are something like four or five hundred sources on that page; I stopped counting at 132 articles. Saying that it's routine coverage is ridiculous. There are literally too many instances of in-depth coverage to mention or count. There is a gigantic, tsunami-size preponderance of in-depth coverage. The artist is not engaging in any self-promotion, they are just listing all the people who have written about them. You would be best to withdraw this nomination, as her notability is not in question in the least. Take chances of this being deleted are so low that they are probably not measurable using modern technologies. ---
Possibly (
talk)
04:12, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Keep sources are not easy to find in a Google search, given the one-word name, but I have added four high-quality sources. It is pretty obvious from this and the above discussion that she is notable. The article was in atrocious condition. I trimmed it and formatted it a bit, but it still needs a lot of work. --- Possibly ( talk) 04:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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.