Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Le Lieu unique

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 no consensus. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:35, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Le Lieu unique[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 any notability. Previously full of self-aggrandisement and peacock phrasing suggesting COI editing. Despite tagging for notability and lack of refs, none have been forthcoming. Searches reveal own website, this article plus many adverts, travel guide listings social media etc but nothing that conveys notability. Fails WP:GNG. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, on the basis it's difficult to imagine a major arts centre in a major city isn't notable, though admittedly it is not so easy to find online sources when they aren't in English. But, for example, Fodors calls Le Lieu Unique the "it" place to go and there's a very comprehensive history and desription in this book. There are also two books about the centre and a lengthy news article cited in the French Wikipedia article. Sionk (talk) 06:20, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - we have no evidence that this is a 'a major arts centre' . Sources that might demonstrate this are very few, even in French. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 13:47, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's semantics, rather than a reason for deletion. Sionk (talk) 04:20, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 11:54, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete On the basis it's difficult to imagine a major arts centre existing for 20 years and producing no more than 2 bare mentions in reliable adjacent sources. I searched all the sources I could find on google and found a bare 2 that were more than "it exists". Neither was very much deeper than "it exists" and they definitely did not support the text of the article as it currently stands. The mentions I could find largely dealt with various protests involving the center, leading me to think this is more of a local attraction and art gallery than anything else. I suspect the permanent staff is 2: the "president" and the janitor. Rockphed (talk) 18:59, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to neutral see below. Rockphed (talk) 11:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, has anybody looked at the French Wikipedia? see here (been there since 2006 with no apparent issues), has more then here on English Wikipedia including references/books? Coolabahapple (talk) 11:07, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That hadn't even crossed my mind. I looked through the 4 sources they had, and 2 of them appear significant. One is from what looks like a culture magazine/newspaper (liberation) and is probably independent. The other is a book, "Le Lieu unique. Le chantier, un acte culturel", and might not be independent of the museum. The other book does not return any web hits when I search for its ISBN. The final source is an interview with the first head of Le Lieu unique, and isn't independent. Also, it looks like the current english version is just a translation of the French version. On the one hand, I think we can establish that the place existed, so this isn't a hoax. On the other, I can't be sure what the relationship between the book I can find and the place is. Rockphed (talk) 11:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:27, 13 September 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.