Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion and merging of articles related to Visual arts. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Visual arts|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Visual arts. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Shortcuts


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

For Visual arts listings only:

  • A simple tag to put on AfD discussions as an alternative to the coding given above under "tag an AFD" is:
{{subst:LVD}}
It displays exactly the same message, but is easier to remember.

See also:

Visual arts

Gelasio di Nicoló


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

Di Nicoló receives significant coverage in Ione or two Italian books on the history of art in Ferrara dating to the period 1840-1900. The only more modern sigcov I can find is in a PhD thesis, which we can't use to establish notability. Per WP:AGEMATTERS, I feel this article fails WP:GNG. Boynamedsue (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

  • Comment: The spelling Gelasio di Niccolò is (a little) more common, and spellings with one C seem only to be used in older sources. Ham II (talk) 08:36, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Michelle Mawby (interior designer)


Michelle Mawby (interior designer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources that clearly count towards WP:GNG/WP:NCREATIVE with independent significant coverage of Mawby or her work (not just brief mentions). Interviews/quotes from Mawby are not independent sources. The only source that even comes close is but even that is mostly quotes from Mawby. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 19:56, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Sleepy Sea


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

One of a number of very lengthy, possibly AI generated, articles about the work of photographer Kansuke Yamamoto . This article is about a single photograph, and basically a description of what a single author says in her book Japan's Modern Divide: The Photographs of Hiroshi Hamaya and Kansuke Yamamoto. As such, Sleepy Sea shows little sign at all of meeting WP:GNG. Time for it to go. Sionk (talk) 17:56, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Photography, Suspected AI-generated articles, and Japan. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:19, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep – The 2013 J. Paul Getty Museum catalogue discusses Sleepy Sea in detail. Amanda Maddox compares it with Magritte's The Reckless Sleeper and discusses the compass, pocket watch and toy gun marked "Japan". She relates the photograph to Breton, its title and postwar Japan. I think that satisfies WP:SIGCOV. WP:GNG does not set a fixed number of sources; its note on sources allows for cases where one source is credible, neutral and detailed enough for a comprehensive article. Maddox's essay appeared in an edited Getty Museum catalogue. The work is also documented in the 2001 Tokyo Station Gallery catalogue and in the 2017 Japanese Surrealist Photography materials. I don't think the nomination's reference to a single author, by itself, shows that Sleepy Sea fails WP:GNG when Maddox discusses the photograph in this much detail. Fontana2026 (talk) 22:35, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Statue of Charlie Kirk (McCann)


Statue of Charlie Kirk (McCann) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is tagged with GNG, has no other notability other than being unveiled, and vandalized.

The other article with a statue has more notability, is better sourced, and has a longer timeline of sources. shane (talk to me if you want!) 14:24, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Radio, and Conservatism. shane (talk to me if you want!) 14:24, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Personally, I'd prefer to have this discussion after a few weeks, but at minimum the article should be merged into Turning Point USA and not deleted entirely. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:39, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge for the few lines of text, this can be merged into the main Turning Point article. Rather non-notable work of art, articles only talking about it being vandalized. Oaktree b (talk) 15:21, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge the statue does not meet notability guidelines for a standalone article. Drdpw (talk) 15:45, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge I am trying to understand how WP:LOCAL applies here. There is considerable local press regarding the work, but on the world stage it seems to be less significant than Freedom (statue). There is scant detail regarding the commission, materials, design, making of the work in the local press, which emphasizes the tragedy more than the work. I am not convinced that even the local press actually covers the work. The world press regarding statue of Charlie Kirk seems to discuss the other sculpture per this, this and this.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:09, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:46, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Wait, then merge. Another Believer is right: The article and its subject are both too young to judge notability just yet. Give it a week or two, then if no additional coverage exists, merge. CopyleftEverything (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Wait, then merge. See whether the artwork receives more media coverage or significant reception. --Apoxyomenus *Wait, then merge per Apoxyomenus. ChurnXeke (talk) 20:41, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge Generally there should be significant media coverage that allows notability to be judged before a page is created. Since it's at the TP headquarters it can be covered in that context without another discussion at a later time. Reywas92Talk 01:57, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Ludmila Christeseva


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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NCREATIVE. I feel kind of bad nominating this because she seems like a prolific artist and activist, such that it seems implausible that there isn't sufficient independent coverage for an article. But a BLP without independent secondary sources is just self-promotion.

My findings in terms of independent coverage:

Astana Times - The publication is independent, but nearly every sentence is a quote from the artist.

Reform News - Primarily about one project with little biographical information about the artist. Also pretty heavily reliant on the artist's own statement about said project.

Kyiv Post - One of these is a decent biographical piece, and as far as I'm aware, Kyiv Post is a reputable news organization - however, the author, Gloria Griffon is not a Kyiv Post reporter or art critic - she is described as a California-based blogger and writer and other than these two pieces for Kyiv Post, her name and (anonymous) profile picture can only be found on the internet at a Russian-language Facebook blog and as the author of a self-published romance novel. I don't know. You be the judge. purringmaggot (talk) 22:37, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

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. WP:G5. Best, (non-admin closure) Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 12:15, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

John Eni-Ibukun

John Eni-Ibukun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Kqol • talk 21:16, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

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.

Mathieu Knippenbergh


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

Dutch sculptor (BLP). None of the sources given provides sustained and detailed coverage of the kind needed for WP:BASIC, and I cannot see anything to suggest that he meets WP:NARTIST either. Dionysodorus (talk) 18:50, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Utopian scholastic


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

Plainly fails notability guidelines.

The article uses three sources.

  • The first (Ubertowska, 2010) seems to just be explaining what a "kitsch" is, given "utopian scholastic" was coined in 2017.
  • The second (CARI) is a primary source from the people who coined the term.
  • The third is a random magazine talking about CARI with a throwaway mention to "utopian scholastic".

Not a single one of these contributes to notability. Through WP:BEFORE on e.g. Google Books, I see again incidental reference in a couple niche, but nothing that pushes it above notability guidelines. This may as well be a redirect to CARI's write-up on the aesthetic. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 22:54, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

If you want to make the article more consistently referenced, try the Vaporwave and Sea Punks bibliographies, since both styles came from utopian scholastics. ~2026-48831-11 (talk) 00:59, 9 September 2026 (UTC)
Note I have changed to delete. As Mooonswimmer says below, I don't see citations that support Consumer Aesthetics Research Institute or its predecessors coining this term. Asparagusstar (talk) 01:46, 10 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Some more references on the relevance of the topic and its notoriety:
- https://peoplesgdarchive.org/item/10785/utopian-scholastic-design-from-a-pre-911-world
- https://bf94e4.substack.com/p/aesthetics-of-hope-utopian-scholastic
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjcj8jgKiDA
If you are deleting this article you will have to delete Vaporwave too. ~2026-48831-11 (talk) 01:31, 9 September 2026 (UTC)
I'm going to do a bit more research for my opinion on this article, but saying "you will have to delete Vaporwave too" is not valid. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS Yojo98 (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete. As much as I personally love this aesthetic, Wikipedia's notability requirements are not based on a subject's appeal. Its only substantial source is CARI, which catalogues the aesthetic. It's Nice That provides only brief coverage, and all the other material I could find online is self-published, crowdsourced, user-generated, a passing mention... (same applies to its alternate name "encartacore"). The available sources verify that the label exists, but not that it warrants a standalone encyclopedia article (yet). I'm not sure that Consumer Aesthetics Research Institute is an appropriate merge target, as doing so could misleadingly imply that CARI itself coined or originally identified the term. Mooonswimmer 23:24, 9 September 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:23, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete. As much as I like the aesthetic, the article in its current state does not demonstrate notability. I am sure this niche aesthetic will warrant an article at some point in the future once a sufficient amount of media coverage has been published about it, but not now. Maxeto0910 (talk) 13:11, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Harley Swedler


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

Clear COI biography. I could find two sources that even approach SIGOV/reliability. One is this NYT article from 1991, which is four paragraphs about a mezuzah that he made. Considering the fact that it includes the cost of the mezuzah and a phone number, I'm not sure the article is independent. The other source I could find is this article from Interior Design magazine. I can't find any discussions about the reliability of this magazine, but it seems to be partly promotional in purpose. Even if both sources work, there's very little encyclopedic content they can cite. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 15:51, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep per WP:NARTIST criteria 4(d) - his work is in the Jewish Museum (Manhattan) and the Judisches Museum Berlin (source). Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep passes artist notability for the reason mentioned above; also indexed in the Getty ULAN . Oaktree b (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete - poorly sourced; two citations are not enough for a BLP. Ping me if you add more. I would be happy to change my mind. Bearian (talk) 21:19, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:25, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete I removed all the unsourced claims for this article. I added a reference to the Jewish museum, which states his year of birth and country. I am not finding any additional reliable sourcing. The Judisches Museum Berlin citation https://www.jmberlin.de/en/snip-it-stances-ritual-circumcision-0 is a press release for a show Swedler curated, a passing mention at the very bottom. I agree with the nominator that the Interior Design piece seem to be promotional. NYT piece is decorating tips. WP:TOOSOON. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:35, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Jahar Dasgupta

AfDs for this article:
Jahar Dasgupta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of this article does not meet notability criteria for WP:NARTIST nor WP:GNG. A BEFORE search finds only social media, Calcutta Yellow Pages, and other user-submitted content, and blog posts, not independent reliable sources. Originally created as a self-promotional autobiography, then recreated and heavily COI edited (based on commons evidence). Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 03:40, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment appears to have newspaper articles that discuss him and his work in detail. Katzrockso (talk) 22:35, 7 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete - autobiographies are disfavored because they almost always have original content. But it's much worse now, because our critics, including powerful men from Boca Chica to Palm Beach, want to use any excuse to take away our charitable status, which would cripple us financially. This is an easy delete, because of the lack of significant coverage. Ping me if you Stubify this or add three more reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete This artist does not meet WP:NARTIST. He has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. Seems more like WP:PROMO, created by an SPA. WP:BEFORE does not turn up any reliable sourcing. All the biographical info is unsourced. I don't see a way to bring this up to notable. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 21:24, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:05, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Gian Galang


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

Nigh-orphaned page about a fairly obscure illustrator. Definitely a working artist with a decent portfolio, but nowhere close to qualifying for WP:ARTIST, with basically no coverage in RSes. MasqueDesRonces (talk) 13:00, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Weak keep - three days ago, was recognized by the U.S. Mint and selected to design a new coin. Other than that he's involved in the MMA scene (MMA fighting news article on his custom shirts for fighters) and Crypto scene, and has a profile in Vice, an interview in notion, a piece on him and his art in middleeasy, etc. Nothing here is amazing or fantastic sourcing wise and nothing tells me like, he MUST be kept, but I'd say he probably squeaks by even setting aside the WP:Crystal ball Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 14:21, 4 September 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for the due diligence, which is much appreciated. The Vice piece alone (which I hadn't found) is kind of swaying me; I'll sleep on whether to rescind the nom. MasqueDesRonces (talk) 15:08, 4 September 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 15:42, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete: Some brief mentions about the coin , nothing to show notability. Not listed in the Getty ULAN . I don't see a pass at any artistic criteria. Oaktree b (talk) 23:53, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Imaginando


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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:ADMASQ. This article was erroneously moved from the draftspace by Katoya78 in 2024, mere days after an AfC reviewer had rejected it as non-notable, following previous similar rejections. The article lacks significant coverage of the company itself beyond an WP:INDISCRIMINATE recounting of its products and promotional history. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 19:41, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Visual arts, Companies, Technology, Software, Suspected AI-generated articles, and Portugal. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 19:41, 3 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment The sources that may be about the company are paywalled, so it is hard to evaluate them. The reviewer declined the draft because of the product section, but I would say it is quite strong as the products are covered by the third-party outlets (unsure about reliability, however), so in principle, one can argue for the notability of the products based on the reviews. Draftification is fine, but the article is too old, so I am leaning toward deletion. Wikipedia.gptzero.me says that the page is human-written with 100% probability. Kelob2678 (talk) 09:27, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
    I was able to reach a few of the product article and there was some substantial coverage. What I can't verify are how independent the tech magazines are that feature them. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 19:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🦅White-tailed eagleTalk to the eagleStalking eagle 20:51, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak keep I think it scrapes past WP:NCORP. Pollia (talk) 19:41, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
    In what regard? The bare minimum should not be enough to justify its existence without any substantial coverage or evidence, which this article is severely lacking. Most of the article reads like a collection of trivial material, editorialized statements, and over-glorified facts to promote the company and its products, none of which are notable on their own and would be WP:INHERITED notability, which is not how notability is determined for related topics. Nothing demonstrates that the company itself yields any notability independent of its products being made from some notable systems. It all around reads like a press release. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 19:51, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Peter Emmerich


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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST. IMDb, a publisher's author page, a fan blog, a faculty directory listing, and a New York Times wedding announcement... Kqol • talk 23:02, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Visual arts, and United States of America. Kqol • talk 23:02, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment: this has been tagged as a potential NBIO failure (amongst other issues) since 2022. (No opinion.). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:14, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Disney, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:14, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Has the one good New York Times feature, if there's another nice write-up somewhere... Randy Kryn (talk) 10:17, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
    That "feature" is a weddings announcement: one sentence on his career, then both sets of parents and an AOL chat room. What in it counts towards notability? Kqol • talk 22:23, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - there's some coverage, and he has a lot of influential fans on Instagram. Bearian (talk) 01:25, 8 September 2026 (UTC)
    Followers are not coverage, and 44000 is not a lot by any measure. The article cites IMDb, a weddings announcement, a publisher's author page, a fan blog and a faculty directory. Which sources are the "some coverage"? Kqol • talk 22:27, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 01:06, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep and improve The article is almost 20 years old! But no one has taken the time to improve it I see some other sources that can be added:

https://www.depaul.edu/faculty/peter-emmerich

https://mariacominetti.it/workshop-with-peter-emmerich/

https://vegalleries.com/art/disneyana/4282/disneyland-theme-parks/walt-disney%27s-100th-birthday-cast-member-exclusive-lithograph-id

https://mouseplanet.com/a-brief-look-at-the-philatelic-history-of-disney/7584/

PlainJane91 (talk) 08:36, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Age is not a reason to keep. see WP:OLDARTICLE. Twenty years is rather the point: nobody has improved it because there is nothing to improve it with.
Your four links are an employer's faculty bio, an attendee's blog post about a workshop they took, a dealer's sale listing and a fan site. Kqol • talk 22:31, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EmilyR34 (talk) 04:26, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Visual arts - Proposed deletions

Visual arts - Images for Deletion

Visual arts - Deletion Review

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks