Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Art Projects International

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. just a tad enough consensus on coverage to keep the article. Otherwise there was nowhere near consensus for deletion JForget 01:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Art Projects International

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts may be tagged using: {{subst:spa|username}}

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

A non-notable commercial art gallery. Though the article cites several sources (and more can be found if you look), these involve oblique mentions, passing statements that so-and-so had a piece at this gallery, etc. So, for instance, the article has a citation to Barron's Magazine, but if you look at the piece, which the gallery helpfully excerpts here, you'll see it's just quotation concerning some artist, followed by a short sentence about "her roster." The other coverage I've found is similarly insubstantial. My PROD was removed with the comment, "[P]ublished book and content with multiple independent references added to page." However, the "book" is just a self-published commemorative piece, as you can see here, which of course has no bearing on notability. All told, this company simply fails WP:CORP. Glenfarclas (talk) 07:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Art Projects International works with internationally acclaimed artists and cultural institutions, including major museums and foundations. The fact that Barron's and other major news organizations, including the New York Times, Art In America, Art News and Art Asia Pacific have interviewed and reviewed its exhibitions indicates the notable stature of the organization and works of the artists that are highlighted. If one actually reads the entire articles, it is evident that Art Projects International is a sufficient authority that notable major news organizations have sought interviews and comments on trends in Asian contemporary art. Links and highlights of critically acclaimed exhibitions at San Jose Museum of Art, Crow Collection of Asian Art, Queens Museum and The Vilcek Foundation indicate noteworthy and substantial support. --Ajlegal (talk) 21:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC) — Ajlegal (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you picked this AfD for your very first edit! Glenfarclas (talk) 07:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Organization represents internationally significant artists including Jean Shin who recently had a solo exhibition at the Smithsonian in Washington, DC and Il Lee who had a major mid-career retrospective at the San Jose Museum of Art) --Nyuarsx (talk) 06:16, 9 April 2010 (UTC) — Nyuarsx (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Can you provide a citation to a reliable source, please? Or anything that would relate to the criteria discussed WP:CORP? After all, if Art Projects International represents such vital and important artists, I'm sure it'll be substantially covered in the press, right? Glenfarclas (talk) 07:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As in preceding post, what is needed is not articles which cover the gallery's artists with no mention of API, but articles where API is at least a part of the article; reviews of shows at API demonstrate notice for the gallery's activities. Ty 17:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, just to start, the most recent citation I came across is a review by The Drawing Center in New York: "Emily Gaynor on Il Lee: Small Works 2001–2010 at Art Projects International" --Nyuarsx (talk) 15:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might like to use any such references in the article!!! I have done so with this one.[1] Ty 16:55, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 01:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Silver seren^C 05:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have tagged this for rescue. Silver seren^C 05:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep From the sources, I would say that the subject is notable enough to have it's own article. It seems to have a considerable part in the New York art world and even have growth dealings with China. Silver seren^C 05:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lacking in-depth coverage.--Pink Bull 05:33, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sourced, documented, and interestingly unique gallery...Modernist (talk) 13:51, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The activities of the gallery get worthwhile coverage in sources. Ty 16:56, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ Comment Cited sources show that the gallery's exhibitions and activities have received press coverage throughout its 17 year history. --Nyuarsx (talk) 00:52, 12 April 2010 (UTC) _{(Struck out duplicate vote — Glenfarclas (talk) 17:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC))} changed to a comment Nyuarsx (talk) 13:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Any coverage is enough, and it receives some. Dream Focus 07:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: DreamFocus, I hope "any coverage" isn't the criterion you're using around here. WP:GNG (and WP:CORP) as for "significant coverage," which is quite a different thing. Glenfarclas (talk) 07:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Art Projects International works with major museums and institutions, collaborating on notable exhibitions and events. The San Jose Museum of Art (ref 1) and the Queens Museum of Art (ref 2) in 2007, The Vilcek Foundation in 2008 (ref 3), and most recently with the museum, Crow Collection of Asian Art in Dallas, on a solo exhibition for artist Il Lee (ref 4).--FT101 (talk) 19:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— FT101 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

The only mention of API in your refs 1 and 2 is an image credit. Refs 3 and 4 are OK, as they state API collaboration in the shows. Ty 03:34, 17 April 2010 (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.