Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabrina Gschwandtner

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:05, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sabrina Gschwandtner

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

Non-notable artist, lacks reliable references. Ireneshih (talk) 16:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 19:52, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The indications [1] are that this is a first article by a new editor on a WP:STUDENT training with a Women in Art focus. In that context, it is unfortunate that it has been brought to AfD less than 24 hours later. AllyD (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a couple of newspaper references, and will look for more, but am dubious that the subject meets the WP:ARTIST criteria, which are set rather higher than in other fields in my opinion. Which can all be discouraging for a new editor making their first contribution. AllyD (talk) 20:23, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - Agree with AllyD. In fact, I am wondering if nominator looked offline - as they should - to see if there are references that could have been added. One for instance is a review of her work in The New York Times [2]. Not only would I vote to keep, but I think this should be a speedy keep. This type of nomination is what scares people away from Wikipedia. Need more references? Here are a few listed on her website [3]. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Links can be added to the museums referenced, but article should stand — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annieredshoes (talk • contribs) 01:16, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Wikipedia has minimal requirements which this article is not meeting. Fails WP:GNG. The easiest way for the article to stand would be for someone to add citations to 2-3 sources. Even if this stands almost all of the content in here needs to be deleted for failing WP:V. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With recent changes article passes WP:GNG. I deleted promotional content which was not backed by references. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multiple sources confirm notability, over time, in independent sources. New editor could have been coached rather than AfDed. Full length interviews [4], [5], multiple showings across the country [6], [7], [8], [9] in both solo shows and multiple-artist shows, acquisition by the Smithsonian American Art Museum [10]. Easily meets GNG and #2 of artist, though file needs the sources cited. SusunW (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep she passes GNG, has work in the Smithsonian and other museums besides. I've added the references that SusunW found so the article doesn't suffer from WP:V, as Bluerasberry suggested. This should never have been up for AfD, only tagged for improvement. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:18, 23 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.