Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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

Coat of arms of Lethbridge

Coat of arms of Lethbridge (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)

No independent RS on the page. Mentions can be found in local media, but given that most of the page here is a description of the image, surely this would be better included as a section on Lethbridge where the image is already shown. WP:NOPAGE JMWt (talk) 13:25, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the merge idea?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 13:48, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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) 09:19, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rubén Ochoa

Rubén Ochoa (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)

Fails WP:NARTIST and GNG. This 2009 article was created by a user listed as Rubenochoa. It is not surmising to consider that the subject is connected to the article. A subject creating their own (personal) international encyclopedia profile is "frowned upon" by normal practices for a reason. There are COI and neutrality concerns. This was mentioned on 10 January 2009. Concerns become more evident when the content mentions things like "international recognition", which is not supported by BLP "sources". It is even more concerning when a person appears to have less than (or even approaching) bare notability and the article is presented as a resume and pseudo biography. There is no common biographical content at all, let alone supported by reliable and independent sources. Note: While my search engine could present location bias, I could not find any mention on any important artist or international list like "Twenty Iberoamerican artists", "Artists you should know", Artists from Latin America or even List of Latin American artists. Otr500 (talk) 09:15, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - This Rubén Ochoa, (born in Mexico, not the Ruben Ochoa born in California) does not meet notability per WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST. The sourcing in the article consists of his website, an unverifiable publication, and a self-published book by Lulu (vanity press). An online BEFORE search for sigcov in independent reliable sources failed to find the kind of sourcing needed to establish notability. Note that these online sources need to be thoroughly examined because it is easy to confuse the two Ruben Ochoas. Netherzone (talk) 02:28, 22 July 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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:00, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sarjin Kumar

Sarjin Kumar (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)

There is little coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources under the name “Sarjin Kumar.” Most info comes from social media or entertainment sites, which doesn’t sufficiently establish encyclopedic significance. The BO77! (talk) 19:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @The BO77! I think the page i have created needs more citation and can be improved. But placing a deletion tag maybe avoided and you can ask for improvement. Thanks! Gooi-007 (talk) 19:58, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! @Gooi-007 but don’t need to remove the deletion tag yourself an admin will close the discussion as “Withdrawn” and remove the tag once processed.The BO77! (talk) 20:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: My source analysis given below
No. Source Type Independent Reliable Significant Coverage Notes
1 Filmibeat – "Who is Sarjin Kumar?" Entertainment listing ✅ Yes ❌ No ❌ No Low-quality site per WP:ALMGS; routine coverage; no depth.
2 ABP Nadu (Tamil) Regional news ✅ Yes ❌ No (Brandwire-tier) ❌ No Trivial mention of entry to a reality show; no biographical depth.
3 Mirchi9 (hypothetical) Entertainment blog ✅ Yes ❌ No ❌ No Unverified; generally unreliable for establishing notability.
4 Social media mentions (Instagram, YouTube) Self-published ❌ No ❌ No ❌ No Fails WP:RS and WP:SELFPUB; unusable for notability.
5 TV appearance on *Cooku with Comali 6* Primary source (TV show) ❌ No ❌ No ❌ No Being part of a TV show cast is not sufficient for notability without secondary coverage.

All sources fail to provide the in-depth, independent, and reliable coverage required under WP:GNG.Thilsebatti (talk) 03:14, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I concur with other !voters here, that although the AFD nom was withdrawn by the nominator, there is no indication that this person meets notability criteria per WP:GNG, nor are a notable photographer, thus failing to meet WP:NARTIST, nor is there evidence that there is the kind of significant coverage in fully independent reliable sources covering his acting career to meet WP:NACTOR. Deleting it at this time would save community time, because it would just be renominated if the withdrawal was put into effect. Netherzone (talk) 15:16, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete source analysis leaves us with inadequate in-depth or otherwise proper sourcing per Thilsebatti. Delete. Iljhgtn (talk) 10:11, 25 July 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. RL0919 (talk) 19:14, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Irony of Negro Policeman

Irony of Negro Policeman (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)

Fails WP:N. There are many reliable sources that mention the painting, but they lack significant coverage. Several of the sources currently in the article don't mention the painting at all, but are just used for general info about the painter, Jean-Michel Basquiat. The ones that do mention it only do so with one or two sentences, or, in one case, is a press release. Some of them looked to me like clear indications of notability at a first glance, such as NPR's "Jean-Michel Basquiat Painting Sells For Record $110.5 Million", but at a closer look, it turns out it is about a different painting.

I searched a bit and mostly found more of the same: reliable sources that only mention the painting in passing - confirming its existence, but not notability - and a few self-published, unreliable sources with analysis. The best I found was this, which contains a couple of paragraphs about Irony of Negro Policeman. I'm unfamiliar with the publication, Swamp, and can't tell if it's a reliable source or not. Nevertheless, if that is the only source that maybe contributes to notability, it's too little.

It seems like this was created some time ago as part of an effort to give as many Basquiat paintings as possible their own articles. I'm sure quite a few of them indeed are notable, but this one and potentially others don't seem to be. Uriahheep228 (talk) 16:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - I've added some sources, but a search of the painting in g-books and g-scholar reveals a lot of mentions as well as a decent amount of in-depth discussion. This and this each have several paragraphs analyzing this particular piece. this describes the piece as one of his most well-known works, which seems to be supported by the fact that it's singled out in several newspaper reviews about gallery exhibits. Zzz plant (talk) 17:43, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first of those sources has almost two paragraphs. The second has about one and a half. The third is behind paywall, so I can't tell. It's still pretty weak, but if there are more sources with a similar amount of coverage they could build up to notability, at least if it's not the same information that is repeated. I also got a lot of search hits about gallery exhibits etc, but they lack significant coverage. They just mention that it was part of an exhibition. Uriahheep228 (talk) 18:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. I take the point about us not wanting separate articles about too many individual paintings but the politically charged subject matter makes it plausible that this is significant enough for an article. The Books and Scholar searches show that sources are covering it as more than just an item on a list of works. They are talking about it individually, about what it means as a statement and as an artwork. I don't think we can delete this. A merge to Jean-Michel Basquiat could be arguable but I think there is potential for this to be its own article. --DanielRigal (talk) 19:25, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Zzz plant. There isn't much unambiguous SIGCOV, but there are so many sources that provide ~1-2 paragraphs of analysis that I think they togther add up to a GNG pass (here are a couple more: [1] [2]). This journal article is the strongest source I could find. MCE89 (talk) 04:09, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The third of those sources looks good, but the first two only have one sentence each, not one paragraph. With the article in Radical Philosophy and the two books Zzz plant pointed to above we have three sources that I would say are somewhere between trivial and significant coverage. The finds so far have been promising, but I still think it's below the threshold for individual notability. Most of the content here is about Basquiat and general themes throughout his works. There isn't really more to cover about this painting in particular than what can be said in a sentence or two in Basquiat's article. Uriahheep228 (talk) 17:02, 20 July 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.

Nick D. Kim

AfDs for this article:
Nick D. Kim (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 lack of independent sourcing to establish notability is still an issue since the 2009 discussion. Sources are still not present to establish his notability.

Since that discussion, he has been mentioned in many books, but those are passing mentions crediting him for the pictures used in them. Roast (talk) 07:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:38, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - passes WP:ARTIST. The subject, a New Zealander, won the Sir Julius Vogel Award, which appears to be a prominent award in that country. The article could do with better sourcing, though.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More specifically, he won the Fan Award for best fan artwork. What is your evidence that this is a prominent award? The article for the Sir Julius Vogel Awards barely even establishes that the set of awards as a whole is notable, let alone that it is a well-known and significant award or honor. And even if the actual professional Sir Julius Vogel Awards are significant enough to establish notability, it seems like an enormous stretch to claim that winning the fan art award is enough on its own to make someone notable. MCE89 (talk) 15:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, for example, according to the Sir Julius Vogel Award article, the "fan award winners" from "1997-2000" are "details unknown." It would be interesting to hear which of the four criteria of WP:ARTIST could possibly be met by winning a "fan award" that no one else can remember who won for four years at a time. Asparagusstar (talk) 19:29, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DesiMoore Even then, there's about nothing else establishing him. In a similar case to Taufik Rosman, the article would be better as a redirect to the award. Roast (talk) 18:11, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Admittedly I'm not familiar with WP:NPROF, but it looks like he could meet #C7a, as he appears to be the go-to expert for NZ media on a number of issues, most notably meth contamination: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Nil🥝Talk 07:48, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    And some more: [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
    Just for some context - in NZ "methamphetamine contamination" of housing (especially rentals) was a huge concern a ~decade ago, and numerous "testing" services were set up (which were in all likelihood no more than snake oil salesmen). Dr Kim was in the media a lot during that time, basically saying the fears were overblown. Along with the media stories, there's a journal article here, featuring Dr Kim - [16]
    And some other articles I found not related to meth but other environmental contamination stories in the media - [17] [18] [19] [20] Nil🥝Talk 01:17, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete it is an unsourced BLP and not a single secondary source that provides any real coverage of Kim as a person has been provided. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:30, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - WP:BEFORE does not provide any reliable sourcing for the claims made in the article. Science and Ink appears to be self published, as does Succeed in Science and Avoid Getting a Real Job. I don't see anything online to show notability. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:18, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Even though sources provided by Nil NZ just above are not yet in the article they seem to provide further notability. The subject also won a Sir Julius Vogel Award. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:33, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep because the sources found by NilNZ above convince me that notability is proven. Unfortunately for this person, googling "nick cartoon" tends to get you Nickelodeon, sort of a search engine optimisation nightmare. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 05:07, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:00, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Because there is literally only one source in the article (a primary citation to his just his dissertation), and the rest is completely unsourced and/or simply original research, we are left to find coverage elsewhere. I would have voted to keep given that he was the recipient of the Sir Julius Vogel Award (which, given that it had a page, I thought might be grounds for notability), but MCE89's comment above has convinced me that the award is somewhat dubious (its unclear if it actually should have a page at all) and may not qualify as a a well-known and significant award or honor.  GuardianH  18:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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. The examples of coverage offered by the article creator were not deemed sufficient by most other participants due to being very brief and/or from primary sources. RL0919 (talk) 19:23, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Homeless Flag

Homeless Flag (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)

Deleted in 2023 via unanimous AfD (WP:Articles for deletion/Homeless International Flag). I cannot find any WP:SIGCOV in independent sources to back up claims of this flag being since adopted outside of this one particular non-profit or the person associated with it. I have decent access to Swedish newspaper archives and cannot find any mentions. Also worth noting that author has declared COI. Zzz plant (talk) 17:31, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Homeless Flag meets WP:GNG through independent, reliably-sourced coverage:
- National broadcaster TV4 – “Kavian var hemlös – nu lägger han all kraft på att hjälpa andra” (3 Dec 2021): at 07:00 – 07:30, the host zooms in on the flag and explains its public display while Ferdowsi adds that “people see the Flag and Hemlösa.se every morning".
- Daily newspaper Dagen – “Premiär för melodifestival för hemlösa” (4 Feb 2015): reports an event where the flag served as the official emblem, quoting politicians and describing its symbolism.  
- The emblem is twice trademark-registered with the EUIPO, confirming its distinctive, legally protected status.
These sources provide significant coverage, not mere passing mentions, in broadcast and print media wholly independent of the subject, and demonstrate real-world adoption beyond a single NGO. In line with WP:SYMBOLS a unique flag with documented media attention, public use and formal recognition is prima facie notable. The article should therefore be improved, not deleted. Csamu88 (talk) 23:03, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I agree with the previous commentor's rationale. This article does seem to meet the WP:GNG guidelines and has been used widely for notable events pertaining to the topic. I definitely believe this article should be significantly improved but I think that it is too notable for deletion. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 23:42, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Reply - Trademark has no bearing on notability, and the above characterization of TV4 source is a stretch - it's briefly visible and briefly discussed on a talk show segment. Even if they gave more in-depth coverage, it's shown by Kavian Ferdowsi (the person who designed the flag) during an interview, so it's a primary source - which can't be used to support GNG. Dagen shows only that the organization associated with the flag uses it at an event they're organizing. I couldn't find any RS suggesting that anyone aside from Hemlösa or Kavian Ferdowsi has adopted this flag (or even paid much attention to it). Zzz plant (talk) 00:25, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:08, 19 July 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=1302026842"