Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conceptual Net Art

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. Cirt (talk) 00:17, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conceptual Net Art

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

I've left this alone for a while to see if it could be improved. However, there appears to be no real improvements forthcoming. This is a neologism that one artist uses to describe his work. All google hits point back to the artist or this article. Otherwise we have hits for "conceptual" and "net art" but not the whole term. Anything else in the article is original research, such as "according to Bala every conceptual art piece performed on internet is conceptual net art piece". It then goes on to state the "opposition" to the term and that it is meant to "simplify" things. Not sure what that actually means, but again it is original research in order to establish the term. Likewise, the attempt to include all internet art as part of this "movement" is reaching in the extreme. The sources are only pointing to this artist (the citation for Carlos Katastrofsky does not mention the term at all). freshacconci talktalk 14:55, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. —freshacconci talktalk 14:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom...Modernist (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I had previously argued for the retention of this item, and appreciate Freshacconci's patience. Sadly, although the phenomenon that the article is describing certainly exists, and is discussed in many places, I think he is right that the term "Conceptual Net Art" to describe it hasn't caught on (or caught on yet), so I do not feel I can press for a keep. Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

comment I agree with Elen of the Roads (talk · contribs) daughter, it is a pretentious term; we have internet art; Algorithmic art; Interactive art; Generative art; Electronic art; net art; conceptual art; neo-conceptual art; digital art; computer art; Software art; Systems art; new media art; Fractal art; Evolutionary art ad infinitum...Modernist (talk) 16:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. NN neologism that appears to be setting up to support sales links at some future point. CliffC (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2010 (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.