Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Pocock, artist

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. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:00, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Pocock, artist[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)

No evidence of notability found, the one source with biographical info is an amateur website, and I can't find any reliable source which gives significant attention to this Edward Pocock(e). Fram (talk) 10:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and England. Fram (talk) 10:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This artist meets criteria #4 of WP:NARTIST; his work is included in the permanent collections of several notable museums. Netherzone (talk) 13:14, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per above.Leutha (talk) 13:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

- If taken literally, like here, that is a rather ridiculous rule. Even if some objects are kept in the depots of rather local museums and aren't on display, and are just catalogied but not further described or noted, it supposedly means that the artist is notable? The British Museum, for instance, has eight million objects, not every artist who has an object in that collection is notable (even though the British Museum is way more important than the musea listed here). The very least one would need to meet this criterion is being (semi-)permanently on display, not just hidden in storage. Fram (talk) 13:39, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  The Norfolk Museums holds over 30 pieces of his work in their permanent collection. (These can be viewed by performing an advanced search of their collections online). Netherzone (talk) 14:22, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Which isn't an answer of course. "Norfolk Museums Service holds over three million objects"[1], being included in these collections is as such not a sign of notability. Fram (talk) 14:49, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    According to our guidelines for notability of Creative Professionals it is. This artist is in the permanent collections of several notable museums. Netherzone (talk) 15:41, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've raised the question at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#WP:ARTIST #4. Fram (talk) 16:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, I've responded there. Netherzone (talk) 16:52, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- His importance is underlined by the reproduction of his work in historical books, such as Great Tooley of Ipswich published by the Suffolk Records Society. They often provide images of buildings which sometimes are no longer standing or have been substantially altered. Leutha (talk) 14:54, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Netherzone. --SouthernNights (talk) 17:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 17:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:NARTIST per above. I'd also comment that it is unreasonable for wikipedia articles notability to be subject to a potentially ever changing count of whether an artwork is on display or not - which is why I expect the SNG primarily requires presence in multiple collections. ResonantDis_tortion 20:08, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and snow per all of the above. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If the article is kept, I think it should be be moved to Edward Pocock (artist) --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 21:17, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes agreed. I had the same plan - but we can't do that until after the Afd is resolved. ResonantDis_tortion 22:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above passes WP:NARTIST #4.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:57, 16 October 2023 (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.