Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Washington mural

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. Consensus is clear that the article does not meet the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 07:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington mural[edit]

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

Does not appear to be a notable piece or art. A search reveals that the only coverage it has received is the reference which is in the article. Significant coverage in multiple reliable sources is lacking. It looks pretty, though. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Narutolovehinata5. I believe this mural is notable and has significant news coverage in local DC newspapers and magazines. I am working on adding more of that information -- didn't really get a chance to before you flagged the article. I also have a short video I made of the mural. I am part of a Wikipedia class at American University and doing a project about public art in DC, and increasing the amount of videos on Wikipedia to increase the awareness of DC public art.

That's nice, but unfortunately not everything DC related can be included on Wikipedia. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 05:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Narutolovehinata5: Any permanent, commissioned, legal mural in a public space is notable, especially if the piece drew some controversy. Since this article was created just moments ago, please refrain from requesting the article to be deleted until some editors have a chance to further enhance it. User:ianakoz 01:36, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to cite which notability guideline says that. Also, there's nothing in our guidelines which prohibits articles from being nominated for deletion moments after creation. It's a good thing the article was nominated for deletion here at AfD, so users have seven days (or possibly more, if this gets relisted) to address the issues raised in the nomination. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 05:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The notability guidelines say the topic needs to have "significant" coverage. While what is "significant" is not defined, if you search for "George Washington mural" on Google, pages of search results list multiple articles that are about it or mention it. Ianakoz 16:08, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did search on Google, and a search revealed mostly false positives. While indeed there was coverage from local media, I don't know... I'm a fan of using local media to establish notability, especially for articles on topics not from America (see WP:SYSTEMIC for the reasons), but for art, it seems that the notability guidelines are quite strict and require broader coverage that this (and arguably, the Marilyn Monroe mural) lack. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 21:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete This is borderline advertisement. Solntsa90 (talk) 06:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also adding to the nomination this article which was created by a different user shortly before the creation of this article. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:48, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Solntsa90 can you explain how this article is an advertisement? Who or what is it advertising other than a public work of art that contributes to Washington D.C's vibrancy and uniqueness as a city? These murals are important to Washington D.C's cultural diversity and legacy, and deserve to be remembered because in the future, the stories behind their creation may be forgotten and they may even be removed or painted over (as many other murals have). What is wrong with wanting to preserve the history of a public work of art that countless Washingtonians consider a District landmark? --Emmakknight (talk) 12:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have redirected the second to Marilyn Monroe mural given that the latter article on the same subject is more fleshed out. Mangoe (talk) 12:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a WP:Run-of-the-mill piece of street art. It needs to be notable in its own right to justify an article and this one doesn't seem to meet that criteria. A Google search only found local references, and the fact that it's in Washington D.C. doesn't automatically confer notability. Neiltonks (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Neiltonks This piece of public art is not a run-of-the-mill work, and is notable within its own right. It has received coverage from news outlets such as WUSA9 and the Washington City Paper, and to discredit these as merely local organizations is unfair. Please consider doing some more in-depth research yourself and checking out the references in the article. --Emmakknight (talk) 20:14, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails GNG. I looked at cited references; short or mention in passing. Could not find anything else. —Мандичка^YO 😜 08:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete insufficient coverage. That the artists are not notable weighs against notability, but the main problem is insufficient RS coverage.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am sorry to call for deletion of an article which was created in good faith by students. Please tell your professor that before they assign people to write articles, they need to familiarize themselves with the Wikipedia criteria for inclusion, particularly the WP:General notability guideline. This individual mural does not meet the inclusion guideline, because it does not have significant coverage from independent reliable sources. But thank you for trying; maybe you can find a way to insert a mention or photo in the article about U Street. --MelanieN (talk) 21:44, 22 May 2015 (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.