Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts

WP:DSPAINTING

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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts/archive

Purge page cache

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:

It displays exactly the same message, but is easier to remember.

Visual arts

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:24, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St+art India Foundation

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

The foundation does not meet WP:NORG. References 1 and 3 are not independent, and Reference 2 is about the founder's passing. Online searches return only trivial mentions with no in-depth, independent coverage. Junbeesh (talk) 07:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Organizations, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:31, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. Delete as per nomination. Fails WP:GNG and not found any WP:RS. Misopatam (talk | contribs) 07:46, 3 May 2025 (UTC) - WP:SOCKSTRIKE ~SG 5536B 23:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete sources do not demonstrate significant coverage. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 18:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unless better sourcing can be found (and posted here if possible). The only solid reliable source is Architectural Digest [1] but that's not enough to pass WP:NCORP or GNG. The article is written with a highly promotional tone, the sourcing seems like PR, and Google Arts & Culture should not be used as a citation (it's like asking AI to write an article about a subject). BTW, GPTzero and Grammerly detects that about 3/4 of the article itself was written by AI. Netherzone (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2025 (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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doodle Kids

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

Fails WP:NWEB and WP:GNG as a software application with hardly any coverage, let alone sustained coverage. Notability issues tagged since 2017. jolielover♥talk 09:28, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Software. jolielover♥talk 09:28, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm not finding enough in a BEFORE search at this time to substantiate the notability of this software. There are several mentions of it (not sigcov), but these are trivial or from poor quality sources. Netherzone (talk) 17:06, 2 May 2025 (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.

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. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Stankievech

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

The article does not establish notability according to Wikipedia guidelines. It does not cite significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Most mentions are local newspapers and none are properly cited. Without clear independent sources demonstrating lasting notability, this article does not meet Wikipedia's inclusion standards. Cagrantsas (talk) 15:49, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article actually only has one primary source about a 2007 video project, I suppose that sentence could be removed. Otherwise, the subject has been covered extensively by independent outlets such as CBC News, Edmonton Journal, Calgary Herald, etc. A simple search on Google and Newspapers.com shows that the subject passes WP:GNG with flying colours. I will see about adding more sources and expanding the article over the next day or two. MediaKyle (talk) 15:56, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the nominator later altered their rationale, changing "primary sources" to "local newspapers". MediaKyle (talk) 18:33, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 16:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The one gallery exhibit in Oakville in the CBC article was at a minor art gallery (source 7), so that doesn't meet artist notability. No listing in Getty ULAN [2] and a lack of critical notice, TOOSOON. Oaktree b (talk) 17:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is the only critical review I could find [3], still not enough. Oaktree b (talk) 17:08, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't understand this vote. I've been adding plenty of good sources that qualify as significant coverage, from independent outlets. Notability is easily established in my eyes. If you look him up and review the sources, you'll find his work has been displayed in many other galleries as well, I just haven't written that into the article yet. MediaKyle (talk) 17:11, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Artists have their work exhibited, that's not notable; one of the notability requirements for artists is to be the subject of a major gallery exhibit or their permanent collection; we'd look at the AGO, the McMichael, the MOMA, that sort of thing. This person hasn't had anything outside of a small independent gallery in Oakville. See here [4].Oaktree b (talk) 21:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:NBASIC. The criterion for having had exhibitions in a major gallery is irrelevant here. The following is a list of secondary, independent sources providing significant coverage on the subject:
Border Crossing Magazine, 2013

The Ottawa Citizen, 2013

CBC News, 2024

Galleries West, 2013

War Art in Canada by Laura Branden

Calgary Herald, 2023

AGO Insider, 2023 - published by the Art Gallery of Ontario

Canadian Art, 2015

The Toronto Star, 2014

I'm quite sure there's more, too. I've only just begun digging into his career, and I've already found all of this. MediaKyle (talk) 21:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b, I'm wondering if you might take a look at all the new sources that have been presented at the discussion. Netherzone (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete: Unfortunately, not enough valid secondary sourcing to prove notability, for now. It's WP:TOOSOON. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 22:01, 26 April 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Comment: Since the start of this nomination I've uncovered seven interviews, exhibitions in many galleries, and a wealth of other sources that can be added to this article. I'm going to hold off for now, as I've already improved the article quite a bit without getting too deep into expanding the prose. If others do not feel this article meets notability right now for one reason or another, kindly allow it to be userfied into my userspace so that I can continue developing it. MediaKyle (talk) 22:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - this internationally known artist clearly meets not only WP:BASIC, but WP:GNG, and also WP:NARTIST criteria for inclusion. In addition to the seven sources brought to the discussion by MediaKyle, the artist has work in the permanent collection of the Museum of Contemporary Art, Montreal [5], [6]; the Agnes Etherington Art Centre at Queen’s University [7][8], and the Musée des beaux-arts de Montréal [9]. He has shown at The Courtauld, the National Gallery of Canada, Palais de Tokyo, Paris; HKW, Berlin; Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Denmark; National Gallery of Canada; has shown in the Venice Bienniale. He has lectured at dOCUMENTA (13) and the 8th Berlin Biennale, and his writing has been published by Verso, MIT, Sternberg Press, e-flux, and Princeton Architectural Press.[10],[11]. In addition to the reviews listed above, there's this in Art in America:[12]. For some reason my BEFORE search is showing lots and lots of significant coverage, not sure why that isn't showing up for others. Netherzone (talk) 14:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, he received the notable Sobey Art Award, Canada's pre-eminent and largest award for contemporary Canadian artists under 35.[13] Also as an author/academic his work has been cited over 100 times. @Cagrantsas, I'm just wondering why you were only able to find mentions in local newspapers and none are properly cited (or independent). Did you use Google or a different search engine? Netherzone (talk) 15:27, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Visual arts, and Photography. Netherzone (talk) 15:05, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Changing my vote to keep after Netherzone's great work and answer, thank you for finding all that. I'm not sure how I overlooked all that information, it should be included in the article if not done already. Subject passes WP:GNG m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 23:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Subject passes WP:GNG. Frank Ken (talk) 11:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Netherzone. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Netherzone. passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:23, 3 May 2025 (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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fire (artscene group)

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

Article tagged as unsourced since 2014. While technically the external links and releases are source, I have not been able to find any other sources that might contribute to notability, including while searching for the founders name instead of the generic "Fire". Attempted to PROD, was removed on the grounds that a generic name and pre-internet subject deserves more attention, so taking this here. Rusalkii (talk) 00:24, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Visual arts, Organizations, Computing, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I am not finding any RS on the internet for this unsourced article on a graphics company. In fact Computer art scene and its sister "Category:Artscene groups" seem to be questionable. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Seems to be original research. A BEFORE search finds nothing at this time. A search of the WP library did not return any hits for me. Netherzone (talk) 17:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - very cool stuff, but I could not find reliable sources for it. MarioGom (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2025 (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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 23:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Singing candle

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

Looking through the history of this article, it seems to have been an art project by the Belgian Bains::connective (an archive of their website). Their website seems to be the only source that has ever been in the article, and the article's original illustration was sourced to that site too. As you can see from that image (and old versions of the article and site), the art project also seemingly made some concerningly fringe connection with psychology/telepathy. More to the point my WP:BEFORE failed to find any coverage in WP:RSs covering this either as a feedback demonstration or as an art project, and thus I can't see this meeting WP:GNG. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 15:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Visual arts, Science, and Belgium. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 15:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: You can seem to buy something similar on the various online stores, but I don't find sourcing we can use for notability. Whatever this stub article is, it has no sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 15:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b, While it wouldn't be a reliable source, I would be interested if you could share such a listing, as everything I can see on online stores are candles (real or fake) that play music, as opposed to the subject of the article which is a feedback experiment which uses a loudspeaker connected to a light sensor to make interesting sounds (and is somehow telepathic?) Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 15:18, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, it's just Amazon and Walmart links to singing candles or birthday cards. Nothing useful here. Oaktree b (talk) 15:22, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ~~or redirect to Rubens tube~~ - It's a cool idea but it's not a notable subject or artwork. Fails GNG. Netherzone (talk) 15:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or incorporate into another article. This stub has somehow survived almost 20 years with no references and no notable sources mentioning this specifically. Afonso Dimas Martins (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2025 (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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tomasz Młynarczyk

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

No indication of significance but potentially notable. Note tag been on the article for 1+ years. I think it probably fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV but don't hold me to it. scope_creep^Talk 09:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Photography, and Poland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the article has an interesting history to be aware of. It was created by a now globally locked account, part of the "Put Radzyn on the map" campaign to promote the town of Radzyn. So I think the sources should be examined very carefully, to analyze which ones are public relations, local promotion, or advertorial content like native advertising that may look like an actual article in a publication but it actually PROMO. Holding off on !voting for now. Netherzone (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - After going through all the sources in the article, and conducting an online BEFORE search, here's what I found: quite a few hits for this photographer, but they are press releases, or event announcements, and photo credits in various publications. A lot is taken directly from Wikipedia. It seems he is a much loved and respected local photographer, who has photographed a broad range of subjects. However most of the sources in the article are primary sources. Some of the citations that look like book reviews are actually synopses written by the photographer himself, and published by the Zwiazek Polskich Artystów Fotografików - Association of Polish Art Photographers, of which he is a member, so not independent. What I did find that contribute to notability are: He designed a stamp for Poland: [14]; review of one of his shows in a newspaper (which I think is local Wyborcza.pl LUBLIN): [15]; and this article, but it is unclear exactly what the publication is but appears it may be an academic journal, info: Młynarczyk, Tomasz. 2011. "Exhibition "Archive - Form And Light and Shadow". Archives – Kancelarie – Collections, No. 2(4)/ (December):195-219. https://doi.org/10.12775/AKZ.2011.007. [16] and another way to access the article: [17]. If kept, the article needs clean up. Netherzone (talk) 15:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Wyborcza is a major Polish newspaper, so it covering his exhibition is a suggestion of GNG, even if, yes, its one of their local (regional) editions. The "academic" article linked appears to be from the subject himself. I am not seeing much else outside was was found above; I think all things considered he is not notable enough for Wikipedia (only the GW article seems to meet slightly stretched GNG/SIGCOV/independent requirements). PS. I nominated it on pl wiki for deletion (pl:Wikipedia:Poczekalnia/biografie/2025:04:30:Tomasz Młynarczyk). It tends to be more inclusionist. Perhaps someone will find new sources or arguments there, I'll update my comment here if there's anything there that I feel is worth mentioning here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:16, 30 April 2025 (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.

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 delete‎. Goldsztajn (talk) 23:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Professional Design Firms

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

Organization that fails WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV was found. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 21:02, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Organizations. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 21:02, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Business, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I couldn't find any sigcov in newspapers.com, pressreader, or google news/books/scholar and I don't see a clear merge/redirect target. Zzz plant (talk) 02:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I couldn't find sufficient sources to pass WP:GNG. Suonii180 (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2025 (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.

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 delete‎. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:36, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Art Fight

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

Fails WP:GNG. Besides the The Verge source referenced, I couldn't find any other independent coverage. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:14, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Websites. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:14, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Events, and Games. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:16, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Other than the Verge, there are no sources to be found. I can only get hits on various uses of the term. Sourcing in the article is primary otherwise, no nothing we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 00:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I agree that it fails WP:GNG. Is there no other subject-specific notability test that this might fall under? It's an event with 400k participants, which seems logically notable to me, but I'm not as well-versed in Wikipedia's notability guidelines as you folk are. Aspharon (talk) 13:52, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails GNG, and also WP:NGAME, and also WP:NWEBSITE. Although it is popular, there is no inherent notability for this type of online event or Internet forum, and popularity does not guarantee that a subject is notable per WP's criteria. Netherzone (talk) 17:19, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per above, fails WP:GNG. Also I feel like the title can be misleading as when I first saw the title, I thought it was a general title about a fighting related to art instead of a game.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Weber (artist)

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

Fails WP:NARTIST. Theroadislong (talk) 13:19, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Authors, Arts, and New York. Theroadislong (talk) 13:19, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 14:55, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Artsy	Primary source database	User submitted content by galleries/auction houses with paid subscriptions	Non-independent user submitted data	✘ No
Harpers Gallery	Artist's gallery showing their work (PR)	Press release in the form of a personal letter from the galleries to the artist	PR, not a review	✘ No
27East	Press release in local paper submitted by the artist's gallery	Press release	PR, not a review	✘ No
Dan's Papers	~ large portion of the text is the artist talking about himself/his work	Profile in local paper	~ Hybrid profile/interview/PR for show	? Unknown
Glenn Horowitz Bookseller	Press release from a bookseller	PR	PR	✘ No
Women's Wear Daily "Fashion Scoops"	Women's wear trade journal	Trade journal for fashion, lifestyle and women's wear	Fashion scoop/society lifestyle (not a serious art magazine; text about Weber is partly occluded by a paywall.)	? Unknown
Gothamist	Local news blog	~ Widely distributed blog	Article is about a local controversy regarding his work, does not seem to be an art review	? Unknown
Grenning Gallery	Art gallery showing his work	Artist bio - user submitted content for selling artwork	Gallery listing	✘ No
Ochi Gallery	Filler. Art gallery press release for another artist	The gallery exist and but this is a press release for a different artist; it is only a name check mention of Weber	This is a press release for another artist, who simply mentions at the bottom that they had shown their work at Nick Weber's studio	✘ No
Boo Hooray Summer Rental	Press release for a show at Boo-Hooray Summer Rental, a "gallery that can be rented for shows in the summer"	PR	Press release, connected source	✘ No
KD Hamptons Art Scene	PR Puff piece local coverage	Press announcement in local "luxury lifestyle diary"	PR, press announcement in local lifestyle blog	✘ No
Chelsea Walls	Interview in the gallery's blog	Interview between artist and gallery	No editorial content, just a few questions	✘ No
Dan's Papers	~ Routine local coverage in local paper, interview with the artist's gallery	Local coverage in local paper	PR for the gallery showing Weber's work	? Unknown
Printed Matter	Book seller listing	Printed Matter is a bookstore selling his book	Book seller listing	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Delete The source analysis table, a nice touch, is very compelling and I couldn't find anything else of worth. Couldn't find a single museum that contains a collection. References are profiles. Nothing really. scope_creep^Talk 16:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No Getty ULAN listing [18] and the source review table pretty much explains the rest. Lack of sourcing or critical review. Oaktree b (talk) 17:15, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I've spent quite a bit of BEFORE time searching of the kind of coverage needed for inclusion, and haven't been able to to find what's needed to substantiate this artists's notability per WP's criteria. The sources consist of user-submitted data, press releases, connected sources (such as galleries that show his work), hyper-local or PR trivial coverage, social media posts and primary sourcing. Does not meet GNG nor NARTIST at this time. Netherzone (talk) 14:50, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Insufficient coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources to pass WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:33, 3 May 2025 (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.

Visual arts - Proposed deletions

Dallas Contemporary (via WP:PROD on 3 November 2024)

Visual arts - Images for Deletion

Visual arts - Deletion Review