Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Holland (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 per research/sourcing found during nomination. Nomination was also withdrawn, but this ran the full time so opting for the keep vs. NW Star Mississippi 15:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Holland (artist)

[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)

Fails WP:NARTIST. Theroadislong (talk) 11:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Boxing, and Olympics. Theroadislong (talk) 11:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not pass WP:NARTIST. Only one source is listed, which appears to be a broken link, nor was it used to back up any of the article content. I did have a quick search for other potential references online but am not seeing anything useful. Editing84 (talk) 11:49, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per sources like [1][2] (ProQuest) and [3] (newspaperarchive) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:40, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I was about to !vote delete on this but did a deeper dive into what might be found online. I found two notable museum collections which puts him over the bar for WP:NARTIST. I added these to the article. There were some other things online which might meet GNG (haven't yet looked at what Gråbergs Gråa Sång has found). But I think this is a case of a poorly written, formatted and sourced stub on a notable niche artist. It can be improved to meet WP standards, I think. Netherzone (talk) 17:51, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Gråbergs Gråa Sång I can't see any of those sources but recent edits have added details of work in public collections so WP:NARTIST would seem to be achieved and I'm happy for someone to close this discussion. Theroadislong (talk) 17:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try accessing the databases first via WP-library, then try the links. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong, I was able to find several long in-depth articles on him online, but haven't added them to the article yet, but I will. This sort of art is not my cup of tea, but it does seem clear that he is notable. Netherzone (talk) 18:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Netherzone and other interested, feel free to dig into the stuff here:[4] too, it was posted by his wife. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - From my own research on the subject, he seems notable. However, the way in which it was written does not show notability. I think more work should be done on the article to make it standard for Wikipedia. Mevoelo (talk) 20:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- First of all the sources already in the article are sufficient to pass GNG. Secondly the guy has paintings in the National Gallery of Art and the National Portrait Gallery, which in itself is sufficient to satisy WP:NARTIST. Central and Adams (talk) 21:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree as the nominator, the article as it now stands passes WP:NARTIST and this discussion can be closed. Theroadislong (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BEFORE please. Central and Adams (talk) 21:33, 24 February 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.