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

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:17, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Viraj Khanna

AfDs for this article:
Viraj Khanna (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:CREATIVE. The references provided are mostly WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Agent 007 (talk) 19:27, 23 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.

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.

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]
Noted. I'm not opposed to a redirect, if that's the case. DesiMoore (talk) 15:21, 31 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: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Nil🥝Talk 07:48, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    And some more: [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]
    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 - [14]
    And some other articles I found not related to meth but other environmental contamination stories in the media - [15] [16] [17] [18] 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]

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=1302723687"