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 no consensus. Barkeep49 ( talk) 02:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply

MutualArt.com

MutualArt.com (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, no significant coverage. Nightenbelle ( talk) 20:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Nightenbelle ( talk) 20:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 20:24, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

• Merge into Artist Pension Trust, which acquired it. This merits a sentence there. As an acquisition I don't think there's anything that could make this article more than a stub, ever. FalconK ( talk) 22:36, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

@ Falcon Kirtaran: If I'm not mistaken, Mutualart acquired ( or it may have founded) the APT. Part of the problem here (hopefully this will be corrected in the AfD process) is that the connection and history of the entities "Artist Pension Trust", "Mutualart.com", "mutualart" and "Mutualart Group" is not clear. It is certainly not correctly or clearly stated in our articles. Possibly ( talk) 03:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

PS: I found a snippet in Google Books of a 1984 Economist article saying that "MutualArt" founded the Artist Pension Trust in 1984. Possibly ( talk) 03:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Regardless, it looks like there should only be one page for all the related companies. If it isn't Artist Pension Trust, then that one should be merged into whatever the page ends up being. FalconK ( talk) 03:30, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

I think we will be OK with one article on Mutual Art, the parent company, and one on the Artist Pension Trust. I have been expanding the article and am having no trouble finding good sourcing on MutualArt and mutualart.com. More in my !vote below. Possibly ( talk) 04:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep, but rename to MutualArt Group. I have done some sleuthing and have now updated the history section to reflect what is really going on. The sequence of companies was "Mutual Art" first, which was founded to operate the Artist Pension Trust, both in 2004. In 2008 Mutual Art started a web site, mutualart.com. There's lots of in-depth coverage on this 2008 MutualArt/Mutualart.com development (I am adding more as I work on it). Finally, in 2016 the Artist Pension Trust merged with Mutual Art and the new entity is called "MutualArt Group".

Given the excellent coverage on Artist Pension Trust, it obviously merits it own article. My !vote to ke*p this article (Mutual Art) rests on the fact that the Mutual Art is the parent group and there seems to be lots of independent coverage of its work ( example). Its website seems to have been an innovator. The current name of the article should be changed to MutualArt Group or similar, and include coverage of mutualart.com. Possibly ( talk) 04:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete – the sources added by Possibly seem more or less undigested press releases and/or more about the Artist Pension Trust than about MutualArt.com. A truly independent secondary source exclusively about MutualArt.com seems to be missing. I'd support a merge to the Artist Pension Trust (APT) article, if that were the name after the merger. It isn't. The name of the company after the merger is MutualArt Group of which both APT and MutualArt.com are brands or branches. How quaky the business model is has been highlighted in independent secondary sources. Neither Artist Pension Trust nor MutualArt.com should be stand-alone articles. Both can be redirects to MutualArt Group, but as long as that article doesn't exist, MutualArt.com should simply be deleted. It is a commercial website with little independent coverage, despite the florid language in its press releases. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 13:35, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

@ Francis Schonken: What you are suggeting is not entirely clear. You say delete but then say "Artist Pension Trust nor MutualArt.com should be stand-alone articles. Both can be redirects to MutualArt Group. So rename? Possibly ( talk) 16:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

I said "Neither ...". Please don't misquote me. I didn't say "rename" about the article under discussion here (i.e. MutualArt.com). The only article eligible to be renamed to MutualArt Group is imho Artist Pension Trust, but neither of these two is under discussion here. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 16:09, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I left out the closing quotation mark and the first word. You say delete but then say "neither Artist Pension Trust nor MutualArt.com should be stand-alone articles. Both can be redirects to MutualArt Group." I am still not clear on what it is you are suggesting. Anyway. Possibly ( talk) 16:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

I suggest to delete MutualArt.com. If the hints I gave regarding a possible solution (which would mean that MutualArt.com could possibly be turned into a redirect without moving it anywhere) are incomprehensible, then, yes, truly, I mean "delete". -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 16:35, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

OK you are clearly saying delete this one. But also saying "redirects to MutualArt Group." conflicts with that idea. Possibly ( talk) 16:38, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Really? MutualArt Group doesn't exist: it is not possible to redirect to a non-existing article. I oppose *moving* MutualArt.com to MutualArt Group while the MutualArt.com article is about near to nothing. The rest is about the current Artist Pension Trust article, which is not under discussion here... but which is also no longer a current company name (so moving that one to its current company name seems OK to me, but that is not under discussion here). -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 16:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

OK, I moved Artist Pension Trust to MutualArt Group, to get you out of your misery. Now I can change my !vote to redirect/merge MutualArt.com to MutualArt Group. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 16:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

I have no misery. It is too bad that you did not bother to update the lede or content of the newly named MutualArt Group, which now makes very little sense. Possibly ( talk) 23:34, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Your "I don't understand" routine was becoming a pretty miserable sight... Anyhow, whether I misappreciated that or not, any issues with the lead section or content of the MutualArt Group article should be raised first at Talk:MutualArt Group. Not here, neither at a user talk page. Thanks. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 06:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC) reply

• Weak Delete - Little or no indication of web notability or general notability. Robert McClenon ( talk) 05:43, 18 December 2020 (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.