Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eliza Douglas

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. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:00, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eliza Douglas[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)

Does not appear to meet WP:CREATIVE-- major critical studies, no works in museums. DGG ( talk ) 07:39, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 08:44, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 08:44, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 08:44, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 08:44, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 08:44, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 08:44, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, base on the artnet profile, this review in CURA magazine, this French-Language review in Artpress, this interview in Hero-magazine with Hans Ulbricht-Obrist (one of the world's top art curators), this short "artists to Watch" piece in W Magazine and this piece in Interview Magazine. It's not a huge amount of coverage, but it does allow me to easily parse who she is and why she is notable. Meets GNG.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 12:21, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: Notable as an artist but not notable enough for a deeper discussion of the meaning behind her artwork. Would shorten to 1-2 sentence stub or just wait for her to break through. ThatLawStudent (talk) 21:01, 7 July 2019 (UTC) Striking !vote by a sockpuppet. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:31, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Saying not notable enough for a deeper discussion of the meaning behind her artwork does not relate to the deletion policy. If the sources are there, is she not notable?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm pretty sure I can find more sources. BTW, Anne Imhof really needs some work and how is it that we don't have an article on Monika Baer? Vexations (talk) 23:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vexations, we do now. Feel free to add to Monika Baer.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:51, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG, as ThatMontrealIP has said it above, and although some editors may say that her collaboration with Anne Imhof doesn't really count as Imhof is the primary artist and there have been a number of artists involved with her works this piece discussing Sex at the Art Institute of Chicago shows otherwise ie. "Since 2012, Imhof has worked with a core group of collaborators, in particular Eliza Douglas, whose contributions to Sex have been integral to the conceptual and aesthetic development of the work." Coolabahapple (talk) 14:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this subject passes our general notability guidelines. Lightburst (talk) 19:46, 12 July 2019 (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.