Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Lawrence Galleries

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Lawrence Galleries[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)

Subject fails WP:NCORP. Everything I found on them is advertisement. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:44, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Companies. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ having separately come to essentially the same conclusion as nom. There's some mere-mentions on Google Scholar but nowhere near WP:ORGCRITE. Otherwise, just promotional database entries online. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm swayed by the quality of the LA Times coverage and based on its timestamps I suspect that additional coverage exists offline. The French Quarterly coverage also helps. Keep _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, added two Los Angeles Times articles without too much searching. The "problem" here is that these are prolific and well-known galleries, and their personal items overwhelm search engines. They have compiled a great deal of self-published articles on art and artists, adding their scholarship and commentary to the field. This is a notable chain of galleries, and while they should have more articles pertaining to their work, the two L.A. Times pages should do for meeting WP:GNG. Randy Kryn (talk) 08:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Martin Lawrence Galleries should be kept on Wikipedia due to its significant role in the art world, showcasing works by renowned artists across multiple U.S. locations for over 40 years, highlighting its cultural and educational importance. Its presence in industry publications and news further supports its notability and relevance, making it a valuable resource for readers interested in art and gallery operations. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2024 (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.