Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Will Ryman

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). SeanMD80^{talk | contribs} 16:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will Ryman

This article is a biography that, while sourced, does not meet the criteria for inclusion of a biographical aritcle. All I can find are listings for gallery showings; there simply is not sufficient 3rd party coverage to support a biographical article. Isotope23 ^talk 18:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

keep A couple of thousand ghits indicate he has displayed his art a fair amount. He isn't just doing this at home and making lawn art, so seems to pass notability. Never heard of him before, but found a great deal of info pretty quick online. The article is sourced, it can be verified, his work has been displayed and talked about. Pharmboy (talk) 21:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 21:52, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep He has shown at PS1 and Saatchi Gallery and has been reviewed in Art in America. Not a lot, but enough to satisfy notability. freshacconcispeaktome 21:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Saatchi & Marlborough refs demonstrate notability. Johnbod (talk) 22:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Emerging, rather than fully established artist, but solo show reviewed in the New York Times, group shows at PS 1 and Saatchi Gallery should be enough to satisy notability requirements.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 22:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
KeepThis article seems in line with other contemporary artist posts, i.e. Elizabeth Neel and Will Cotton. Saatchi and P.S.1 legitimize the article along with NYTimes writings on shows.24.239.175.125 (talk) 12:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Revanche (talk • contribs) 00:33, 18 January 2008 (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.