Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libby Werbel

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 redirect to Portland Museum of Modern Art. Lradon You will be able to retrieve the text of the article via the "View history" feature and selecting an old revision to view. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:37, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Libby Werbel[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)

Hello. The initial version of this article stated that Werbel "is the founder and director of the Portland Museum of Modern Art (PMOMA)" without clarifying that PMOMA, to quote from one of the sources, is "a microscopic basement space in her friend’s music shop". The current version of this article still states in the lede that Werbel "is an artist" but I am not sure that is correct: she appears to have studied art, to be the founder/owner of an art gallery (ie PMOMA), and to have curated exhibitions at various museums. Content about Werbel and PMOMA is supported by very primary and/or very local and/or very niche sources. Content about exhibitions Werbel curated does not pertain to her own notability, but rather to the notability of the artists whose production was on display. To conclude, the subject does not pass GNG. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Biwom (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Biwom (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Biwom (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft space or user space. I'd like to give this editor more time to work on the article, which was created at a recent Art+Feminism event. I don't see any harm in preserving the page's history in the draft or user space. The page can be deleted at a later date if no further improvements are made. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Portland Museum of Modern Art.~~Delete~~ PMOMA has some good coverage (example) but if we just go by that it seems like BLP1E. Someone would have to find in-depth coverage on her other accomplishments, which is possible but, judging from my search, seems unlikely. If we remove the items that talk about the development and programming of the PMOMA, there are three sentences left. eThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:12, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Changing my !vote to redirect, as Portland Museum of Modern Art actually seems to meet notability requirements.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. This person may be notable. Let's give the article a bit of room to breathe. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:58, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- As an alternative to deletion, if Werbel is not independently notable, the page would serve as a useful redirect to Portland Museum of Modern Art.Thsmi002 (talk) 11:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Thsmi002:... I think you may have missed something here: PMOMA is not a museum, it is a basement art gallery that Werbel decided to call Portland Museum of Modern Art because "it would be funny and bold". So the article you have created, even assuming the topic is notable, is very very misleading and miscategorised. Actually, you have just amplified what I was trying to fend off. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cheeky, yes, but Portland Museum of Modern Art seems to meet notability requirements: coverage over time in reliable sources. Changing my vote above to redirect to Portland Museum of Modern Art. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Werbel's work with PMOMA is notable for the artists whose work it has presented, internationally recognized artists and those who have been included in exhibitions such as the Whitney Biennial. It is common in the second decade of the 21st century for project spaces such as this to make significant contributions to culture. Lradon (talk) 22:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep & Improve (not sure if that means draftify or not) Werbel's curation, if it receives its own attention, IS notable and I think the citations support that. Culd also see putting this in a section under PMOMA except that article is currently so teeny. Jessamyn (talk) 01:20, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I created this article. Werbel's curatorial work might not be fully captured if it were to be folded into the PMOMA article. Regarding the assertion that her activities have not been widely covered in secondary sources, such is the state of arts criticism, but her work has been covered by every significant regional outlet from the statewide daily paper to public broadcasting. I will continue to add information to the article. Lradon (talk) 22:38, 1 April 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.