Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belle Linsky

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Belle Linsky[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:BIO. Lack of significant coverage in multiple secondary sources, as evidenced by the large amounts of original research. Coretheapple (talk) 14:01, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Ruyaba (talk) 14:43, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is definitely notability, but I am not sure if the article should be about Jack and Belle Linsky together (there seems to be a fair bit of coverage about them as a couple, and as much about him as about her in one of the sources), or about the Jack and Belle Linsky Collection, which there is also a lot of coverage about. I note that she had an obituary in the New York Times, and I have seen many comments in AfDs that that is enough to prove notability. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:53, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is an obituary on Jack Linsky in the New York Times. It does not say that he cofounded Swingline with his wife. That is mentioned in only one of the articles cited in the Belle Linsky article and its accuracy is unclear, especially since the obituary of Belle does not say that she was co-founder. It is a brief obituary of the kind the Times does not run anymore, and I don't believe it is sufficient to establish notability. Coretheapple (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the lede to read "owned" the company with Jack. There is no evidence she co-founded it.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure there is much evidence of co-ownership. What I do see is a lot of orginal research. No shortage of that. Coretheapple (talk) 01:26, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge to Jack and Belle Linsky Collection. Together they were significant art donors, and after his death she made a huge mark in the art world by creating the J&B collection at the MET. There is coverage to attest to this, in the NY Times, Business Week, a profile in Artnews, the Americana Annual, this book on Law and Ethics and in passing mentions of the collection. I think the question here is not so much notability as it is what the page title should be. (I have removed all the original research that I could find in the article.) ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:23, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looking around, it seems there are 11 mentions on WP of the collection, so perhaps it makes sense to rename the page Jack and Belle Linsky Collection, and to add some basic bio information for Jack. Changing above !vote to reflect this. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:39, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:ThatMontrealIP's !vote then should be interpreted as "Keep", although suggesting rename too. Merge is not meant, because there is no target to merge into...this is to be kept and reworked. Rename is not really an AFD outcome; note it is not included in (unofficial but helpful/interesting) wp:AFDSTATS reports. I !vote "Keep" with a rename suggestion below, myself. --Doncram (talk) 03:42, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. "Keep... and then rename" is certainly an outcome!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 07:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, though renaming/moving to Belle and Jack Linsky, say, would perhaps be appropriately done by editors continuing to develop the topic. I think their apparently notable $60 million art collection can be covered as a section in an article named for the couple. While exact title doesn't matter too much, i think that way is more natural than covering the personal bio type info in an article titled to be about the collection. --Doncram (talk) 20:25, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further, it would be awkward to talk in an article titled to be about the collection at the Met about all their other stuff, i.e. about the Linsky family's other art, including that donated "to The Israel Museum, Tel Aviv Museum, RISD Museum, Minneapolis Institute of Art, Art Institute of Chicago, North Carolina Museum of Art, LACMA, Snite Museum at Notre Dame, Spencer Museum of Art at The University of Kansas, Museum of Fine Arts Boston, Godwin Ternbach Museum, Davis Museum at Wellesley College, Allen Memorial Art Museum at Oberlin College, Nelson Atkins Museum, and Detroit Institute of Arts", and to talk about their "largest Fabergè collection in America, and second only to the Queen of England in the world", etc. A future rename can be left to editors at the article, does not need to be decided as part of this AFD. Any rename should reflect changes to the article, too, not yet done. --Doncram (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (but renamed and scope expanded to include Jack). Between owning a notable corporation and their contributions to the art world, the Linskys have fully met notability criteria. caknuck _° needs to be running more often 21:20, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's unusual to have one article on two people unless they are referred to as such in multiple independent secondary sources (as in Laurel and Hardy). That is not the case here. Coretheapple (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2019 (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.