Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visual Artists Ireland

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. Sandstein 06:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Visual Artists Ireland

[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 apparent substantial sources. The ones in the article are either mere notices of press releases. DGG ( talk ) 23:10, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:21, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DGG I've added a few more sources and information about their activities and will continue to do so. The organsiation is very important and longstanding in Ireland with a significant membership base and numerous publications. Hesperian Nguyen (talk)
Delete The coverage is all minor. The trivial and minor sources Hesperian Nguyen has added do not help notability. as they say on their talk page, VAI are their own publisher of most things, and newspapers don't write articles about them. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:11, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've added many better citations tonight – I admit this article needs work – from major news sources. [1] a quick search in the Irish Times shows how frequently they are relied on and talked about on key issues affecting Irish artists. Further, I don't think it is fair for ThatMontrealIP to use casual conversation from my talk page out of context to support claims for deletion. I was asking for advice on a nuanced topic. Hesperian Nguyen (talk)

It is not out of context, you were talking about the article subject.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:47, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I maintain that it is out of context in what I was saying about the article subject which is that despite a clear history of publishing books, documents on policy, and their own newspapers, there remains a scarcity of articles solely on the organisation. Further I was saying that individual artists pages are not held up to the standards this page is being held to, and that I have experienced similar problems trying to improve gallery articles. I was asking for your help in navigating this dilemma. This context was entirely missed. I'd appreciate it if you don't misuse my words in an effort to undermine a reasonably proposed article about an organisation with a lot of credibility and influence. Hesperian Nguyen (talk)

Like you said, there remains a scarcity of articles solely on the organisation.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:10, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And as you said: "You should be carefully synthesizing statements form several discrete sources"... which is what I've done/am doing :-) Hesperian Nguyen (talk)

Keep, the page is now well sourced. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:33, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at WP:ORG it is clear this article qualifies. I will add some more details about the artist welfare work and the artists payments work as both constitute continued influence, impact, and coverage of the VAI. Hesperian Nguyen (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:46, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the body is real, active and known in arts and policy circles, if not with a strong public profile, and there is now enough referencing to support this.SeoR (talk) 09:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes general notability guidelines. Missvain (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2020 (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.