Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medrar for contemporary art

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. WP:NPASR. T. Canens (talk) 22:55, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Medrar for contemporary art[edit]

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

Probably not notable non-profit art exhibit, only 1 somewhat usable source (ahramonline). This is a copy/paste move from Draft:Medrar for Contemporary Art. The article currently lacks a few more sources to establish notability (the draft has been declined after the content was already copy/pasted). A Google search for addtional references shows only few hits. Suggest to delete the live article and continue work on the draft version to find more reliable sources (and to re-phrase the article's promotional language). GermanJoe (talk) 15:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no verifiable sources in English. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 07:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:17, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete I'm not sure how a Google news search with 19 hits (17 from Al-Ahram) counts as "no verifiable sources in English", but the fact that the only in-depth news coverage comes from a single newspaper has me leaning towards delete. If someone can find more sources, I will be swayed towards keep. Primefac (talk) 12:19, 12 August 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.