Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuscan red

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. v/r - T P 01:29, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tuscan red

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

This is just a dictionary definition of a non-notable shade of red. bobrayner (talk) 17:54, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Tuscan red is a notable red pigment being discussed in detail in sources such as Organic coating technology and The painter, gilder, and varnisher's companion. I'm not sure about the other colours but, as the nominator doesn't seem to have followed WP:BEFORE and misrepresents our WP:DICDEF policy, they should be given the benefit of the doubt. Warden (talk) 18:21, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Tuscan red is a notable color used widely in art as a pigment. It is also used in interior design and in Southwest Design. It is also the name of a Prismacolor colored pencil. The color Tuscan red was famous in the 1950s as the color of the electric locomotives of the Pennsylvania Railroad. Keraunos (talk) 21:26, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless some of this “detailed discussion” from these sources is actually brought into the article. As it stands, it’s entirely useless and unencyclopedic. –jacobolus (t) 03:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AFD is not cleanup. The nice thing about listing sources and relevant content here is that these AFD discussions are never deleted. It is therefore more sensible to work where the content is safe from deletion rather then where it is not. If you want the article updated immediately, you are free to do this yourself. Warden (talk) 10:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See also:
Thanks for your time; bobrayner (talk) 18:12, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. — frankie (talk) 17:14, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Please check the article in its current state. It really was extremely popular as a rail car passenger color. Novickas (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per the standards of WP:AWW. VMS Mosaic (talk) 04:47, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable pigment and associated color. The nomination of this group of articles was quite clearly done without considering the possibilities for development of the articles--which varies. This is one of the notable ones. DGG ( talk ) 02:46, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a good example of a color that actually is notable. It's widespread use by the railroad industry, and the coverage of it by that industry, is good enough for me and Wikipedia.--Slon02 (talk) 17:43, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This color has enough substance and enough sources to qualify for an article here. (Kudos to Keraunos and Novickas for their improvements to the article since nomination.) --MelanieN (talk) 17:45, 17 September 2011 (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.