Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Genovese (artist)

Source: 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 delete. Star Mississippi 02:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Genovese (artist)

Michael Genovese (artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails

WP:GNG. 4 pageviews in 30 days for an American BLP is very low. Edwardx (talk) 17:24, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

*Keep I’m seeing sufficient coverage, both in depth and continuing, that I’m not comfortable with deletion. Page views may be low, but irrelevant as sourcing is sufficient in my mind. Jo7hs2 (talk) 17:46, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, although at the present it's more of a resume than an encyclopedic article, the sources are enough to keep, and hopefully at some point the page will expand. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete
    WP:ARTIST is met. MetricMaster (talk) 09:01, 23 March 2023 (UTC) This user has made 47 edits to Wikipedia. Their contribution history shows that 38 of these were to AFD discussions. The account exists for votestacking and has been blocked.[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discounting the blocked sockpuppet there does not appear to be a strong consensus one way or another. As a suggestion, perhaps elaboration on which specific sources show notability and/or why they are insufficient would help form consensus?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 06:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The items referenced in the article, if they are verifiable, are insufficient to show
    WP:NARTIST. The article fails to show that Genovese has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. As I have previously commented, the references are mostly local and quite a few are dead links. He is a working artist who exhibits, but I cannot find any material online that shows notability. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:11, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Sourcing in the article is problematic (there are a lot of dubious sources here, source 11 being a link to the Frost Art Museum homepage for instance, while source 9 is a 404 - let alone the others already flagged as failing verification - and this is typical of the quality of references), there simply is little or even arguably no evidence subject passes WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There isn't even a real notability claim in the article. -- asilvering (talk) 00:58, 11 April 2023 (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.