Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jurek Wajdowicz

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. – Juliancolton | Talk 03:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jurek Wajdowicz

[edit]
Jurek Wajdowicz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Search for Jurek Wajdowicz on HighBeam Search for Jurek Wajdowicz on JSTOR)

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement." It was deprodded by User:Joshmchugh (creator) with no rationale (despite the fact that I explicitly asked for one in the PROD), so we are here. To reiterate, there are no reliable, in-depth sources about this individual to justify him passing WP:ARTIST: what is there are mentions in passing, particularly on affiliated galleries and some related brochures and such. The claim of "most influential graphic designer of the past 50 years" sounds nice, but the reliability of [1] is dubious, and anyway, all that was apparently needed for inclusion was... getting more than one vote. Overall, that's one of the weaker vanity bios I've seen in the last months - even Google News gives me only one mention in passing... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but tag Appears to be notable e.g.

...I would suggest keep but tag for promotional. SageGreenRider (talk) 23:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SageGreenRider: The NYT mention is in passing, and does not satisfy GNG requirement for in-depth coverage. The book is a book (art book) by the subject ([2]), and does not help much as he clearly fails notability as a writer. His prime claim to notability is being a photographer (artist), but he fails WP:ARTIST. I am sorry, but those two links do not make me change my view on his notability. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment User:Joshmchugh has added a bunch or awards and so on on the talk page Talk:Jurek_Wajdowicz#The case against deletion of Jurek Wajdowicz SageGreenRider (talk) 13:45, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, but none of them seem notable. Now, granted, I am not an art expert, and I'd welcome input by someone who is, but "over 950 awards worldwide" - I wonder if it also includes awards from elementary school and onward? Seriously, not all awards make person notable. And the list seems designed to overwhelm, but provides very little proper citations. Entries 1 and 2 do not even include awards name. Entry 3 sounds nice - "American Photography Awards.", but there's only one Google hit: [3], the target link seems broken too. Not sure if he was nominated or won something, or such, but him winning the award received no coverage anywhere else. Even if he won, this award for example seems to be given to 300+ people yearly ([4]), and frankly, suggests to me that this and other awards are on the level of winning Wikipedia:Featured picture, or perhaps Commons:Picture of the Year. Nice, but does not merit The person's work... (c) has won significant critical attention criteria from ARTIST in my book. I certainly don't have time to review other awards on that list; unless someone here can argue that any of them satisfy the significant critical attention. (This also drives home the point we really need a list of all worldwide awards, with their notability-granting-of assessment, sigh).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:30, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:36, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great point about the level of notability applied for various professions. In the field I'm interested in (design, contemporary art, media and photography) the KEEP decision for Wajdowicz is sort of obvious to me. To quote from the foreword of "Liminal Spaces" by professorFred_Ritchin, well-known expert in photography, Dean of Education at International Center of Photography and prominent writer on the subject: "...Seeing and looking are hardly the same. The riches reside as well in the parallel universes, those which conventional photography, quoting from appearance, hardly seem to take into account. In the hints and smatterings of shape in Wajdowicz’s own images, in his embrace of negative space, appearance manages to conceal itself, implying the gaps of the forever in-between. The engaged viewer can then infer ways to re-imagine, while Jurek’s lens argues for a less traveled space. It is no wonder that his imagery reads like jazz. In an adjacent universe Wajdowicz is also one of our foremost designers in active pursuit of human rights. The concentrated rigor of his design, his careful choice of photographers to investigate the world’s horrors, is constructed on a platform that can be said to be revealed by the images in this book. Underneath the excruciating deviations, the mass graves and obscene deprivations, there is a reminder of humanity’s potential for coherent complexity and grace. From the cacophony, as referenced in Coltrane’s “A Love Supreme,” Jurek’s judicious scalpel carves a space to contemplate what humans do to each other. But he also leaves open an uplifting possibility of what they, we, might instead choose to accomplish...". Hope it helps - Prahamediafanatic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prahamediafanatic (talk • contribs) 07:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would've helped - if they said it in a reliable source, and you provided bibliographic details to cite them. Sadly, you did not. Do ping me if you do. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:31, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Couldn't simply find any significant coverage. Doesn't pass WP:BIO or GNG, delete.—UY Scuti Talk 12:36, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep wonder if the editors specializing in design and art, specifically in graphic design and photo-journalism, can weigh in here? Wajdowicz is a major figure in this field. Specific expertise in those fields is necessary to realize his creative input and influence. Also see: Talk:Jurek_Wajdowicz#The case against deletion of Jurek Wajdowicz SageGreenRider (talk)Prahamediafanatic (talk) 17:03, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment After looking at more sources (and having received some messages from the subject), I think there may be at least one non-local, reliable source with in-depth coverage. The book "Liminal Spaces", which in the article/Google Books has a foreword/article by professor Fred Ritchin. It is, sadly, not available online (and most sources credit the subject, Wajdowicz, with sole authorship) even for a preview, but I think we can AGF that it is the case (WorldCat lists him as a foreword author, and it's a reliable source). The question, therefore, is is this source sufficient? To which I'd say it depends on its length. Is this indeed an article-long analysis of his work (academic articles have an average of 8k words), which would cause me to seriously consider withdrawing this nom, or is it a much shorter equivalent of a blurb? Can anyone verify how long this section is, or perhaps provide a link to a digital copy of the article? (For anyone in the States, check [5]; it does not work well for rest of the world, including my part of it). I also thought whether [6] meets WP:ARTIST 4b, but given it has no text to explain the works' significance, I am not convinced (the other entries at the bio article for where his works are held are unreferenced or less likely to meet the definition of "significant collection", IMHO). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentI bought my copy in Prague's art bookstore. I see it's in the library of Chicago Art Institute, Harvard U and the New York's Metropolitan Art Museum, among others. Piotrus: I found also this link - http://ewsimages.com/work/books/liminal-spaces/. Cheers, Prahamediafanatic (talk) 20:09, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per keepers. Not an area the internet covers that well. Johnbod (talk) 03:38, 14 November 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jurek_Wajdowicz&oldid=1086071917"