Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adolph Behrman

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. Later improvements to the article swayed the discussion towards keep (non-admin closure) —JmaJeremy✆✎ 05:55, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adolph Behrman

edit
Adolph Behrman (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)

Article on an artist. Notability is not asserted in the article, and the only secondary source is a book from which it is difficult to determine whether Mr. Behrman received any notable coverage. Google search turns up some art sales records but that's it. Google Books turns up a few mentions, one in English and most in German, which appear to mention him only briefly. I don't feel he meets notability guidelines per WP:ARTIST. PROD was twice declined. Mr. Vernon (talk) 02:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The subjects obscurity in the record and in his works is explained by the fact that he was murdered in the holocaust.

An entire generation (or two) of European Jewish artists were swept away, much of their work, related records etc, destroyed; if they had not already recieved world -wide recognition by September 1939. This is no excuse for deleting the article. Indeed such a record needs to be started to be kept. Wiki is the ideal place. How well is pre-war European Jewish art represented on Wiki? The subject sounds like a notable example of a naturalistic modernistic Jewish artist who had notablity in the pre-war Jewish artistic community. The article should be allowed to live and grow. Irondome (talk) 21:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Irondome (talk) 05:08, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. GBooks has more sources under the spelling Adolf Behrman[1]. Here is a brief entry in a French-language encyclopedia.[2] --Arxiloxos (talk) 05:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Thanks, it's still kind of slim. Note that not all of the hits are about this Adolph Behrman; a few are about a German printer who went by that name. And while I don't read Polish, it doesn't look like Behrman was the subject of secondary coverage; he's listed as a Jewish artist who was another victim of the Holocaust. I honestly wouldn't mind if he was listed in this fashion - an article on pre-WW2 Polish Jew artists could be very interesting. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 07:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Though it can be appreciated that the notoriety of authors who create during a period of oppression do suffer, there is no reason to apply an exception to a lengthy human history of that very repeated pattern, and that just because one author loses notoriety while another does not falls distinctly under the "X vs Y" ideology of WP:WAX. As such, there are insuffient reasons to retain, and WP:BIG, WP:PLEASEDONT, and WP:IKNOWIT appear to be motivators. Without a greater cataloging and accounting of known and recognized works this author is WP:NN. Ren99 (talk) 06:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • None of the above seem to really apply here. I cant think of another example of such a mass murder of artistic talent in modern European or indeed World history. By the above logic, all Jewish artistic or intellectual pre war work which attracted notoriety by an audience which itself was murdered should be excluded, because the record of that notability has been largely destroyed. Seems like a circular and slightly distasteful argument, in the context of this category of artist. I know its unintentional.
  • I propose the following.There is a current list of Jewish artists. There is also a list of Polish artists. This short article could be added, to whatever list is more appropriate. It can then be worked on by those readers who have an expertise or interest. We should guard against any over-zealous deletion here.Irondome (talk) 23:46, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 07:40, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I oppose the deletion on the grounds that as was eloquently stated above, this artist did exist, he used one N in his last name and was Polish by geography. Like over 100 other Jewish artists cut down in their prime during the Holocaust he is known as an Inter War artist. His work has been exhibited recently in the museum located in Kazimierz Dolny and here is a citation from an encyclopedia (online/and published) titled, Around Jewish Art: http://www.artcult.com/_Around+Jewish+Art/Catalogue/art-40-1305681.htm?Group=2&lang=EN&Artist=B%25

Please review and admit this article. My specialty is the Interwar period in the arts of Poland. As such I am preparing an article about this period and the artists who played a role in it and are remembered. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardFoster1 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


  • The credibility of over 40 years of subject mater knowledge should amount to something. The Bherman listed in ArtCult is the same, but an error on Darmon's part. I have personal knowledge of this artist as does Dr. Waldemar Odorowski, the former director of the Nadwishlanskie Museum in Kazimierz Dolny.
  • This article should stay. * http://jewishpaintings.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/abraham-adolf-behrman-1876-1943/ signed: Richard Foster1

— Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardFoster1 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RichardFoster, please understand that the suggestion to delete the article is not based on the suspicion that Adolph Behrman did not exist or was not an artist, but on the suspicion that he has not been the subject of multiple, reliable, independent sources. These might be non-vanity press books, magazines, notable art critics, newspapers, etc. Wordpress pages are effectively self-published and aren't generally considered reliable. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Participants please respect all the format guidelines for deletion discussions at WP:AFDFORMAT. L2 headers are also not required, and comments should be signed. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Article bulking up nicely. More cites needed but a respectable stub and growing. I think the notabilty test is nearly passed, as subject was notable in the Polish-Jewish artistic community. If this doesnt pass then by the same logic any other minority artist etc on Wiki should be deleted, using the samr "notabilty" criteria. If they are notable in their ethnic context, that should suffice. Irondome (talk) 02:24, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 04:54, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I found several sources, including under the spelling Behrmann (it's him; same birth and death dates, plus the same titles of artwork), plus a memoir about the Jews who perished in a Polish ghetto by a man who knew Behrman. One of Behrman's paintings was used as the cover of the memoir, which is now cited in the article. The article has been improved. AuthorAuthor (talk) 11:54, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close as keep. Proper sourcing in an ongoing problem with articles about foreign artists (especially from the non-English speaking countries) whose names have been anglicized in good faith (they scream and shout, this in an "English" Wikipedia) thus making them almost untracable at their places of origin. User:Piotrus was the first who noticed the problem with his given name, and than of course, there was a multitude of different spellings of his last name. In the end, without the knowledge of Polish, articles like this will always be difficult to defend. Sorry about that. Poeticbent talk 18:44, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The arguments for retaining this article are compelling. Behrman was a victim of the Holocaust but what he has left behind, produced in difficult circumstances, is a reminder of his notability which was not allowed to grow. The article should be allowed to grow here.--Zananiri (talk) 14:37, 23 August 2012 (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/Adolph_Behrman&oldid=1137541161"