Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ana Uribe

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. The page has been much improved since originally nominated, and I am convinced by those saying this passes WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:42, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ana Uribe[edit]

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

No plausible claim of biographical notability or general notability.

Google search shows that she exists and uses social media. Wikipedia is not Facebook or LinkedIn. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:18, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:18, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG. Looks like as clear case of WP:TOSOON. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 07:18, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:57, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG. And I'm not even sure we can say this is WP:TOOSOON, because she is 63 years old and has been exhibiting for almost 40 years since she graduated from art college. If this is the most information we can find about her after four decades of work, I don't think she's suddenly going to become more famous in the near future. Richard3120 (talk) 14:07, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this person is Ana Lucía Uribe, not to be confused with Ana María Uribe, the niece of former Colombian president Álvaro Uribe... she has some notoriety due to drug trafficking charges. Richard3120 (talk) 15:45, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Richard3120: Please add her full name with a source, not least to help readers who may be looking for the other Ana. Thanks. PamD 08:33, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Here are some sources Drexel show [1] Mention in Mother Jones article [2] another Philly mural book [3] Art Guide Texas [4] Offering here without interpretation or claims that they do/not establish notability.--Theredproject (talk) 19:06, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added some sources from Newspapers.com and Project MUSE. Many individuals who have careers in the nineties aren't going to pop up on Google searches. Muralists are especially poorly covered, IMO. She passes CREATIVE. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:11, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

please point out how she meets WP:CREATIVE? I do not see how that is possible.104.163.147.121 (talk) 18:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:Creative is certainly not passed here, as it calls for major widely recognized contributions to the field. The contributions here are not minor and barely recognized, as evidenced by the difficulty to find proper sourcing.104.163.147.121 (talk) 18:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I would strike this !vote but my 121 IP above has expired. She does seem notable now that I look more closely.104.163.158.37 (talk) 03:24, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree with @Megalibrarygirl this artist has met WP:NCREATIVE, as well as WP:GNG. Antonioatrylia (talk) 09:51, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Earlier comments need revisiting in the light of article improvements
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 01:16, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:42, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not notable. Her coverage in media was within Philadelphia in the context of overall arts and murals in the city, not herself specifically. Not meeting Wikipedia:Notability (local interests).Acnetj (talk) 12:57, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Notability (local interests) was a failed proposal. Lonehexagon (talk) 01:24, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NCREATIVE + WP:GNG.Hmlarson (talk) 08:22, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Her murals have been mentioned in two books about murals in Philadelphia,[5][6] and in newspapers [7]. One of her murals is featured on NPR.[8] I think she passes WP:ARTIST for her murals as "The person's work (or works)" have "become a significant monument" (they are significant monuments in Philadephia) and have "won significant critical attention" for the coverage in books, newspapers and NPR. Lonehexagon (talk) 23:33, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: notability under WP:CREATIVE is a bit on the weak side, but the article is in decent shape and the sources check out. I don't see that the project would significantly benefit from the deletion of this article. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:07, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Her murals are significant monuments for the Latino community in Philadelphia. Her work is mentioned in two books from a major University press. She is featured in interviews in Spanish and a feature-length documentary about art and rural life in her native Colombia. In interviews, she mentions that because her primary medium is murals, some of her work in lower-income sections of Philadelphia have not survived over her career, due to arson, fire or demolition, making her current works more important to document as she gets older.Dorevabelfiore (talk) 20:09, 8 April 2018 (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.