- 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. Among the policy-based !votes, the nomination was regarding concerns about notability. User:Peshrout stated how the article had been expanded. The !vote by User:Sionk countered the concerns regarding the topic's notability, and the nominator later commented that they feel notability has been established in the article. The comment by User:Kaldari is policy based, but is a comment, rather than an !vote. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:52, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Tom Nussbaum
- Tom Nussbaum ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I do not see anything here to indicate notability. No works in major museum collections, no prizes. Accepted from AfC nevertheless DGG ( talk ) 02:55, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- NOTE: I created the page and I understood that a collaborator was going to add some images of the public art. I admire the sculpture at the Montclair Bay Street Station every day, and more than a thousand people walk by it each day. Somerville station has similar exposure. Please leave the page up for a month and let us see if we can convince you of this artist's interest. Peshrout —Preceding undated comment added 18:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- NOTE: With the help of Nussbaum, the entry now is updated with more public works, and a list of honors. Images to follow after the holidays if the entry remains. Peshrout —Preceding undated comment added 16:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 08:09, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. The artwork just existing and having people see it isn't enough. Lots of artists have made gates or have permanent installations. Gm545 ( talk) 08:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. A public artist like Tom Nussbaum ought to be searchable. It would be premature to delete the entry at this time, although it needs more development. jmh39 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmh39 ( talk • contribs) 13:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. If someone saw public art by Tom Nussbaum and wanted to find more information about it, a Wikipedia page would be the fastest and easiest way to learn more. The point of Wikipedia is for the public to get information about a given topic or person. Maddylion22 ( talk) 17:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree that having a useful source of information about an established and public artist is important. What benefit is there to removing this article?. Wikipedia is a destination for people looking to learn more about a subject, so why reduce the amount of information available here? TimS4DDP ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:12, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. Some of the above accounts appear to be single-purpose sockpuppets. Kaldari ( talk) 18:55, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
@ Peshrout: Whether or not they have a public art installation is irrelevant here. In order for the article to be kept, it should demonstrate how Tom Nussbaum meets at least one of the following four criteria (giving specific examples):
- The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
- The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
- The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
- The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
Right now, it appears that the subject meets none of these criteria, so it is likely the article will be deleted. Kaldari ( talk) 18:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - an obvious 'keep', based on the ample news coverage listed, even if you discount the very occasional gallery publication (some of the aryicles are transcribed on the artist's website and I've no reason to doubt many of them are substantially about Nussbaum and his work). Quite evidently an artist who has been producing successfully over a period of several decades. Meets general notability criteria. All the same, article needs clean up and some inline citations would be useful. The probable sockpuppetry above indicates the article might need close monitoring for over enthusiastic promotion! Sionk ( talk) 00:02, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I think the article now shows notability. I would not have nominated it in its present condition--I think my nomination brought forth a great improvement, which is the ideal result of an afd. (tho not its primary purpose) DGG ( talk ) 21:00, 12 January 2014 (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 keep. Among the policy-based !votes, the nomination was regarding concerns about notability. User:Peshrout stated how the article had been expanded. The !vote by User:Sionk countered the concerns regarding the topic's notability, and the nominator later commented that they feel notability has been established in the article. The comment by User:Kaldari is policy based, but is a comment, rather than an !vote. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:52, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Tom Nussbaum
- Tom Nussbaum ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I do not see anything here to indicate notability. No works in major museum collections, no prizes. Accepted from AfC nevertheless DGG ( talk ) 02:55, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- NOTE: I created the page and I understood that a collaborator was going to add some images of the public art. I admire the sculpture at the Montclair Bay Street Station every day, and more than a thousand people walk by it each day. Somerville station has similar exposure. Please leave the page up for a month and let us see if we can convince you of this artist's interest. Peshrout —Preceding undated comment added 18:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- NOTE: With the help of Nussbaum, the entry now is updated with more public works, and a list of honors. Images to follow after the holidays if the entry remains. Peshrout —Preceding undated comment added 16:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 08:09, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. The artwork just existing and having people see it isn't enough. Lots of artists have made gates or have permanent installations. Gm545 ( talk) 08:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. A public artist like Tom Nussbaum ought to be searchable. It would be premature to delete the entry at this time, although it needs more development. jmh39 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmh39 ( talk • contribs) 13:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. If someone saw public art by Tom Nussbaum and wanted to find more information about it, a Wikipedia page would be the fastest and easiest way to learn more. The point of Wikipedia is for the public to get information about a given topic or person. Maddylion22 ( talk) 17:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree that having a useful source of information about an established and public artist is important. What benefit is there to removing this article?. Wikipedia is a destination for people looking to learn more about a subject, so why reduce the amount of information available here? TimS4DDP ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:12, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. Some of the above accounts appear to be single-purpose sockpuppets. Kaldari ( talk) 18:55, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
@ Peshrout: Whether or not they have a public art installation is irrelevant here. In order for the article to be kept, it should demonstrate how Tom Nussbaum meets at least one of the following four criteria (giving specific examples):
- The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
- The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
- The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
- The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
Right now, it appears that the subject meets none of these criteria, so it is likely the article will be deleted. Kaldari ( talk) 18:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - an obvious 'keep', based on the ample news coverage listed, even if you discount the very occasional gallery publication (some of the aryicles are transcribed on the artist's website and I've no reason to doubt many of them are substantially about Nussbaum and his work). Quite evidently an artist who has been producing successfully over a period of several decades. Meets general notability criteria. All the same, article needs clean up and some inline citations would be useful. The probable sockpuppetry above indicates the article might need close monitoring for over enthusiastic promotion! Sionk ( talk) 00:02, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I think the article now shows notability. I would not have nominated it in its present condition--I think my nomination brought forth a great improvement, which is the ideal result of an afd. (tho not its primary purpose) DGG ( talk ) 21:00, 12 January 2014 (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.