Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnomieBOT (talk | contribs) at 16:14, 8 May 2025 (Archiving closed XfDs (errors?): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doodle Kids). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Artists
Shortcut
Deletion Sorting
Project

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:
  1. 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.
  2. 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:
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:
{{subst:LVD}}
It displays exactly the same message, but is easier to remember.

See also:


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 03:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noël St. John Harnden

Noël St. John Harnden (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)

Promotional in tone and a clear WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG fail in my opinion. Aspening (talk) 01:21, 8 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trace Fryer

Trace Fryer (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)

I've done a deep BEFORE search on this person by all three names she has used, as well as the name of her gallery, but have not found much more than social media, primary sources, user-submitted content. Note that there are two other people named Trace Fryer out there so a careful search is necessary. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. There were couple mentions of shows that took place at her gallery, but no mention of her or about the gallery itself, so does not meet WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. As a musician I could find nothing. I found one thing that she wrote, for STEAM Journal, but that's not enough to meet WP:NAUTHOR. Current sourcing is not enough to establish notability either. Bringing this here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 21:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source Assessment Table below
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
No Two images of her work and an artist statement authored by the artist User-submitted content No Two images and one short artist's statement ✘ No
Steam Journal table of contents - https://scholarship.claremont.edu/steam/
 No It's the same publication as above, just the table of contents for the journal which lists her name Table of contents for user submitted content No Table of contents listing her name only ✘ No
No Wedding announcement and gift registry User-submitted content No wedding announcement in a template ✘ No
No Art Center Alumni newsletter User-sumbitted announcement of a show she was in No One sentence stating she had a work in a show ✘ No
Animal Studies Association - https://animalstudies.org.au/about
 Association Yes Australian association No Mission statement for the Association, does not mention the artist at all ✘ No
Animal Studies Association image gallery - https://animalstudies.org.au/gallery
 ~ Association website with images by artists Yes Association No One image by her in a display of about 30 other artists ✘ No
No B-Corporation statement about her own gallery Tax status and mission statement by the gallery she owns No User-submitted content, written by the artist themself ✘ No
Blog that accepts user-submitted content No Blog with a mission of "Want Your Pics Published Here? No One sentence mention about a unicorn painted on a utility box by the artist Starlah Burke and this artist using the name Trace Johnson (one of the three names she uses) ✘ No
Yes Press release about galleries who will provide art for a show Yes Reliable art magazine No Simply lists the name of the gallery owned by Trace Fryer ✘ No
Yes Reliable weekly art tabloid Yes Been around for years No An image of an artist's work who showed at her art gallery (Name-check's the gallery's name only) ✘ No
No Press release for a show at the gallery Yes Art magazine seems reliable No Press release - user-submitted content ✘ No
No Table of contents listing the artist's name for a short artist statement and written by the artist, same as citation User-submitted content No Artist statement by the artist and two images of her work ✘ No
Animal Studies Association - https://animalstudies.org.au/gallery
 ~ Duplicate of citation 6 Yes User-submitted content to an Association's website No One image in a website "gallery" among ~thirty other artists ✘ 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}}.
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Yes Two images of her work and an artist statement authored by the artist Yes No Reference to her acceptance to an international art exhibition. ✘ No
Steam Journal table of contents - https://scholarship.claremont.edu/steam/
 Yes Accepted artwork in publication about Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics education (STEAM education). Yes Table of contents for user submitted content No Table of contents listing her name only ✘ No
Yes Art Center Alumni newsletter Yes Confirmation by the publication that she is a graduate, year of graduation, as well as mention of notable exhibition at the San Diego Natural History Museum. No One sentence stating she had a work in a notable show. ✘ 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}}.
  • Comment regarding the second source assessment table. None of the these three sources meet WP:GNG by a long shot. The Human Animal Art piece in Steam Journal is not independent nor is it secondary, because she wrote it, created the two images and submitted it herself to the journal. A two sentence artist statement she wrote herself is not significant coverage. WP needs to know what others have said about her and her work, not what she says about it. WP:SIGCOV would be something like an independent column-long review about her work in a notable art magazine or newspaper (authored by someone else), or a chapter on her work in an art history book. The second source is simply an entry on a table of contents listing her name and the title of the artist statement she wrote. That is not significant coverage, it is non-independent trivial coverage, a simple name check. The last one is a single sentence in her alumni newsletter, therefore non-independent, stating that she had a piece in a show. That is not in-depth, independent significant coverage either. Netherzone (talk) 00:29, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand what you are saying and I will look for that type of article as well as improved references. Starlighsky (talk) 01:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The uniqueness of the artist working with and publishing articles in animal culture and related issues is noteworthy. Starlighsky (talk) 02:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)Starlighsky — Note: Starlightsky is the creator of the article that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
    Keep 73.247.25.130 (talk) 21:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC) — 73.247.25.130 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
    KEEP, This person has several credible sources online showcasing their artistic contributions as well as humanitarian causes, including a website listed under https://www.tajartinc.com/ which has been registered since 2015, and https://somethingromantical.com/ which showcases Trace's current musical venture. SensoryX (talk) 22:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)— SensoryX (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
    Both of these citations are user-submitted content by the artist themself, so they do not contribute to notability. I'm really curious as to how @SensoryX and the IP 73.247.25.130 above found this specific AfD out of the blue to make your first edits ever to the encyclopedia. Please explain, as it's unusual. Netherzone (talk) 23:22, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I am submitted this information because I have seen this person's work, and have been to their establishments in the past, I am not the person noted in this article. I am not submitting on anyone's behalf, Im only submitting my own personal information that I know to be true. Im also not responsible for your feelings of "this being unusual", so I do not have to explain that. Is this site now authenticated based on if something being typical now?
    I'm not sure why your expressing personal feelings here, wikipedia is meant to showcase information about the articles headline, and I have done so. I'm only speculating, but you seem to have a personal issue or agenda with this page unrelated to its authenticity. SensoryX (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Respectfully, no. Saying it's "unusual" is not a feeling, it is an observation. Wikipedia has almost 7 million articles; it is unusual that two brand new editors, who have never edited WP before would find this specific AfD out of the blue to make their very first edits. And no, I do not have any personal issues or agendas. Netherzone (talk) 15:05, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - For the previous voter, uniqueness is not the same as notability, which is required for a Wikipedia article that covers how/if she has made a mark in independent media. This one is an attempted resume and personal portfolio like any that could be found at her own sites. It appears that she is making an honest living with some intriguing art and writing, but there is not enough for an encyclopedic article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I just want to add that the author is unique in the creation of Animal-Human art. Uniqueness is mentioned in WP:NAUTHOR as "The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique;".Starlighsky (talk) 01:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)Starlighsky[reply]

@I respectfully disagree that this artist was unique in creating "Animal-Human art". Depictions of animal-human hybrids have been around since prehistoric cave painting. Also, consider depictions of the Griffin, Minotaur, Centaur and other mythological creatures. Netherzone (talk) 14:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, any individual work or art could be considered unique because it was created by a human being, but the more important requirement in the cited provision is "significantly new" for which I agree with Netherzone. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My line of reasoning is that it is significantly new because of the contemporary publications and exhibitions with science related societies such as the following:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STEAM_education#The_STEAM_Journal
Australasian Animal Studies Association Starlighsky (talk) 20:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The STEAM journal citation is user-submitted content authored by the artist, it consists of two images and a short bio. It is not independent significant coverage. Netherzone (talk) 23:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These are not about hybrids, though.
The contemporary artwork address abstract issues like the work of Eckhart Tolle did. Starlighsky (talk) 20:13, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for another inquiry about this but it's unclear what you are saying. Could you provide an example of what you mean by "Animal-Human art"? What is the definition of this genre, and what are the reliable sources that state she is the innovator of "Human-Animal art"? Is it something Eckhardt Tolle wrote about her work? Thanks in advance. Netherzone (talk) 20:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Anthrozoology is a good reference point to what Human-Animal art is in contemporary art. The Australasian Animal Studies Association (AASA) is a society that addresses this in terms of their contemporary art exhibitions. I will look up references on this issue. Starlighsky (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm quite familiar with the field of Animal Studies, and many artists who have worked in that field. In fact, I can think of many other contemporary artists who have been working in that area for decades. What is needed are citations that specifically state that she originated/created the field. Netherzone (talk) 21:57, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are various artists who have approached this topic, yes.
I just to add that the issue is separate to what was discussed near the top of this thread. There is artwork of human animal hybrids, but the artwork about human animal behavior in terms of science is a separate issue.
The artist did not start the movement, but is unique in that the artwork was covered by a journal on Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Mathematics education (STEAM education) as well as the Australasian Animal Studies Association in terms of their exhibition of the art of the person from the U.S.. Starlighsky (talk) 00:02, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- Lacks RS for the claims made. In 2024, she married English musician and record producer John Fryer citing "The Knot"!? WP:TOOSOON. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I took the recommendations and improved the citations, and even added more information with citations. I am glad to get your opinion on the improvements. Starlighsky (talk) 03:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Starlighsky Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:Citation overkill, and also the source assessment table above. I flagged the statement While in college she illustrated for The Beastly Ball at the Los Angeles Zoo. The Beastly Ball is a fundraiser with interactive events for and at the Greater Los Angeles Zoo Association. which was cited with this https://zoo-guide.com/la-zoos-beastly-ball-2024-an-overview/. The citations shows that the The Beastly Ball exists, but there is no mention of Trace Fryer that I can see, You removed the {{fails verification| date= May 2025}} tag without providing any new information to prove the statement. Please slow down and see if you can respond to the notability issues with reliable sourcing, not just more of the same unreliable sourcing. Thanks. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:51, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What happened is that the illustration for the Beastly Ball is published, but the source will not meet the standards for Wikipedia. I thought it was logical to delete the statement about the illustration work until I can find a reliable source for it. I will keep working on it. Starlighsky (talk) 16:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to see you removed the statement, but please, scroll up to the top of this entry, expand the Source Assessment Table and try to understand the concept of reliable sourcing, and why this article on a BLP was nominated for deletion. Thanks. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:27, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will work on the issues that you have brought up. I created a 2nd opinion source assessment table with what in my opinion are reliable sources. I will work on the issues that you present in the 1st source assessment table. Starlighsky (talk) 17:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Press releases are never a reliable source. Please read Help:Introduction to referencing/Reliable sources --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed that from the table and will try to find a better reference. Thank you for your insight. Starlighsky (talk) 17:41, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't see the sources showing much notability of the subject. That she had some galleries faeturing her work, it not notable as manyother artists get their stuff featured too. Certanly not enough for stand alone article. Reads like a promotion or resume of the subject. Ramos1990 (talk) 06:00, 15 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. WP:SNOW keep. This probably also falls under speedy keep criteria #3, considering the article cited two non-image sources at the time of nomination [1]; it now cites several more. (non-admin closure) Toadspike [Talk] 11:26, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coronation State Portraits of Charles III and Camilla

Coronation State Portraits of Charles III and Camilla (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)

Article entirely based off of two non-free images. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:29, 6 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 23:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stone Malone Gallery (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 short-lived former gallery does not meet notability criteria for WP:NCORP nor WP:GNG. The sources consist of a short PR blurb; a bio of the owner on Widewalls which is user-submitted content; a press release from PRweb about an artist's show not the gallery itself; a paid advertisement in the LA Times; a PR blurb in a local paper; a few reviews of artist's show in HuffPo & InstallationMag & AmadeusMag that just name-checks the gallery; and the gallery's own website announcing the closure. An online BEFORE search only finds social media. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 17:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I would humbly suggest that while short-lived, the gallery in question was indeed notable in that it introduced many artists who have gained more mainstream success. It was the first place in Los Angeles to give any street artists a solo exhibition. Before Stone Malone Gallery, street artists had only exhibited in groups. It was an underground scene, which would explain the lack of mainstream coverage, but it was a scene that attracted quite a bit of notoriety and a high-profile celebrity clientele...which -- when documented at all -- is typically only documented in social media. KCAL News called it one of the "Top Art Galleries In Hollywood" and included it in a list of the "10 Best Art Galleries In West Hollywood" (which was deleted as "duplicate citation" but there were actually two separate articles). Elvissinatra (talk) 22:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Per nom. Netherzone (talk · contribs) made a good WP:BEFORE work. I also found one source on CBSnews [2] and a few blogs covering the subject. Not enough to meet WP:GNG. -- Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 16:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/Improve - I made some substantial additions to this article and it seems like there's something to the "street art" thing but it's tough to track down more good citations for it but I believe they're out there. Jessamyn (my talk page) 00:05, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Jessamyn, thanks for your improvements, I saw them before nominating the article. They are not reliable sources, tho. The problem with the citations that you added is that one is a Press Release (a primary source) from PR web; the other is a small paid advertisement in the LA Times, it's not a review or an article it's an ad; and the Widewalls piece is being flagged (in red) as a blog containing user-submitted content. It is WP:ADMASQ - Native advertising, advertising mascarading as editorial content. Here's what Whitewalls mission statement is: Our goal? To make buying art accessible to all. It calls itself "a marketplace" that sells Works of art for all budgets and Secure shopping and free returns within 14 days - it's not a serious art magazine like Art in America or Artforum or Frieze, it's a web-based art sales service. All three of these are very poor quality sources that do not count towards WP:GNG, and more importantly, do not count towards WP:NCORP. Netherzone (talk) 00:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete WP:NORG not met. SIGCOV is not established. Poor sourcing like its own website, WP:HUFFPOCON and some random websites. Graywalls (talk) 01:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Seems to have some coverage, but then again so do many other galleries. Most sources look like announcing it was opening or promo type of stuff. Don't see it as notable. Ramos1990 (talk) 23:04, 13 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 merge‎ to Florentijn Hofman. asilvering (talk) 05:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bospoldervos

Bospoldervos (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)

I don't think this public sculpture of a shopping fox meets notability criteria for works of art. Fails WP:GNG. The sourcing is weak, a blog and what appears to be a human interest story. A BEFORE search finds social media postings but not anything of substance. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 16:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.There seems to be quite a few news stories from when it was built/completed in 2020[3][4][5][6][7] and it's now getting sustained coverage such as this 2024 book[8]. The alternative to deletion would be a merge to Florentijn Hofman. Jahaza (talk) 18:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for finding those, Jahaza. The book, 1000 Things to Do in the Netherlands, is not a serious art historical analysis, it's like a tourist guide, so I wouldn't consider it a reliable source. Good work on finding the local news articles about the progress, but again, not sure about these, as it's local coverage reporting on a local spectacle. You came up with an excellent merge target as an alternative to deletion, makes a lot of sense. Netherzone (talk) 19:14, 6 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. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 18:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Benedetta Bonichi

Benedetta Bonichi (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)

The artist does not meet notability criteria per WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST, as a teacher they do not meet WP:ACADEMIC. The sources consist of blogs (Weird Fiction, and Trend Hunter), press releases or primary sources with a simple name check. None of these are reliable sources that provide significant coverage. An online BEFORE did not find anything of value, just social media posts and eBay. Netherzone (talk) 15:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete I dont see any indication of notability, the claim that her work is in multiple permanent exhibitions is not supported by the source attached. If it were, this would change the picture. --hroest 13:03, 7 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. JBW (talk) 21:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plastic Weaving Art

Plastic Weaving Art (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)

Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT prevents unilateral return to Draft, however, in view of the creating editor appearing unwilling to take the advice of reviewers, I feel deletion to be the correct route. As part of my rationale I quote the latest reviewer, Theroadislong: "still entirely inappropriate tone and unclear what the sources are supporting as they are not inline...see WP:REFB". I see WP:ESSAY and WP:ADMASQ, together with a paucity of correct referencing. I doubt WP:GNG. I cannot spot it. The term is not a neologism per se, but this appears to be a 'new thing' not (yet) having notability. The odd reference scheme means ity is a WP:V failure 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:29, 5 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 06:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cecilia Frank

Cecilia Frank (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)

The article reads more like a CV than a wikipedia article, and may be autobiographical. The subject does not seem to be notable enough to have an article - there are no sources online that I can find about them other than professional or personal sites like LinkedIn and Instagram. I'm raising this under notability concerns rather than on WP:G11 CSD terms out of an assumption of good faith, but speedy deletion may very well be warranted. Pluma (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Leaning delete as the individual seems to fail WP:ARTIST - however, given this is a Swedish designer, I would like to see someone fluent in Swedish take a look into her and make sure we aren't missing some significant Swedish language coverage not available in English. Worth noting that the same user has also created a few other articles on Swedish designers (and one company) with what appear to be similar issues: Nikolaus Frank, Lars Lallerstedt, and Frank Etc. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 08:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Swedish-speaker here, I can't find any coverage of subject in the Swedish press (I searched using her name, husband's name, design firm name). There is an English interview w/ them here[9], but I don't think we can base a stub off this + not sure about the source reliability wrt notability. Zzz plant (talk) 03:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I've likewise tried and failed to find Swedish sources – searching for Cecilia Frank and designer or design yields nothing in the Swedish newspaper archives I've got access to, for example. Would be delighted to change my !vote if someone has more luck than I have. /Julle (talk) 12:32, 8 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 14:24, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St+art India Foundation

St+art India Foundation (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)

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]

*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 ~SG5536B 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[10] 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 delete‎. Goldsztajn (talk) 23:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Professional Design Firms

Association of Professional Design Firms (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)

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

Visual arts - Images for Deletion

Visual arts - Deletion Review

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Visual_arts&oldid=1289434122"