Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Paul Fauves

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 delete. Particularly per Mduvekot's analysis. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

John Paul Fauves[edit]

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

Seemingly only one notable reference, the others seem to be either interviews or non-notable sources. WP:BEFORE showed much the same. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 23:22, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning delete. The relevant standard here is WP:ARTIST, for which criterion 4 states: "The person's work[...] has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition". The subject has had a solo show at the Guy Hepner Gallery, an exhibition space that apparently isn't notable enough for its own article. That said, the solo show was written up in Italian Vogue and in Forbes, which may be congruent with "a significant exhibition", but I'm not totally swayed. If somebody can unearth other coverage about the show I'd be happy to revisit. A Train^talk 18:59, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - there are some good sources, albeit a tad breezy. Bearian (talk) 01:09, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are several sources, but they are all striking similar. All are similarly promotional. Flaunt calls Fauves "The acclaimed Costa Rican artist", and so do pleasemagazine, danskmagazine and Forbes contributor Felicity Carter. What's funny is that no one mentions who gave Fauves all that acclaim. Fauves doesn't appear to have a long historical record of exhibitions. In fact, it's almost as if ‘A Loss of Innocence’ is the only exhibition he's ever had. So acclaimed by who exactly? And where? Nobody knows. Almost all reviews focus on a single exhibition at Guy Hepner. None of the reviews resemble a serious, critical assessment like one might find in Artforum. In fact, the serious art press is conspicuously lacking. This is an artist who is quite effectively, it seems, promoted by his gallerist. That the creator of the article is a paid editor for another page, may be a coincidence and simply mean that they are unaccustomed to writing neutrally, but a clear statement on whether this article was paid for would be most welcome. Mduvekot (talk) 17:56, 15 August 2017 (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.