Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nishiyama Minako

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. Discussions on whether or not the title should be changed should be done as a requested move. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:03, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nishiyama Minako[edit]

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

No real evidence of notability. Google search shows that she exists, and shows the usual vanity hits, but no in-depth independent coverage. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:56, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 18:27, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 18:27, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Likely~~ keep. On its face, the exhibition at the 21st Century Museum of Contemporary Art, Kanazawa (a national-level institution) is good evidence of notability to me. It appears she's also had works presented at the Setagaya Art Museum, among other places. Is there a specific notability guideline for artists that you're arguing this doesn't meet? Dekimasuよ! 21:56, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, most cites will be under Minako Nishiyama, which is also where the article should be per our title guidelines. Google Books brings back significant coverage in Consuming Bodies: Sex and Contemporary Japanese Art edited by Fran Lloyd, along with hits in Schoolgirls, Money and Rebellion in Japan by Sharon Kinsella, Architecture: The AIA Journal, etc. Dekimasuよ! 22:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:41, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:41, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG, in addition to above, Nishiyama has had her work exhibited on numerous occasions at various galleries, here is a list, and another here that includes journal articles. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:48, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Exhibiting "on numerous occasions at various galleries" is 100% routine non-notable activity for all artists. That is what artists do: make work and exhibit. Exhibiting is only mentioned in WP:CREATIVE for very major exhibitions, so it would be good if you stopped using this for a rationale at AfD because it is patently lame as one.104.163.147.121 (talk) 05:04, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

why dont u just go and get ...... Coolabahapple (talk) 12:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

by this i mean go and get reading wp:creative instead of insulting people. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:21, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take it that way. I was merely pointing out that arguing that an artist is notable because they "Exhibit on numerous occasions at various galleries" is not a convincing argument. Nor is it included in WP:CREATIVE. The GIST of WP:CREATIVE is that artists need to have done serious, important shows, created important work, made a significant impact in the field, and/or become a notable and important member of the creative profession as recognized by their peers. Exhibiting "on numerous occasions at various galleries" is like the first rung of the ladder for an artist.104.163.147.121 (talk) 06:52, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, "That is what artists do: make work and exhibit" and thats how their body of work gets "well known", oh look part of no.3 of wp:creative.... and being discussed/reviewed in journals/books (part of what is cited above) the other part of no.3. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:27, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you actually read part 3 of WP:CREATIVE, which you are completely misinterpreting it. It says: "3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." In short, it says 3a) artist does something important and 3b) someone writes something major about it in a major book, film, etc. MAJOR is the key word. 104.163.147.121 (talk) 06:56, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

104.163.147.121, you are ignoring "well-known work(s), and "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." in your above statement, and placing too much emphasis on the word "major" that in 3. relates to the creation of the work(s) only, whether something is "significant" on the other hand ... is revealed by the 2nd sentence ie. be "the primary subject of an independent and notable work or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Coolabahapple (talk) 14:07, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are misinterpreting the policy. You've missed the phrase "in addition" that joins major work with reviews and criticism. The two go together.104.163.147.121 (talk) 18:07, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since this particular artist has been the subject "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews," I'd suggest that this discussion would best be continued on user talk pages. Dekimasuよ! 23:06, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

hi Dekimasu, sorry about this, i sometimes(?) get carried away, and will stop this now. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:48, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A little searching turns up a long list of national and international exhibitions, as well as multiple references in books about Japanese culture and art. Which I have added. I also agree that the article name should be changed to Minako Nishiyama as per guidelines. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 22:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are enough sources showing passing both WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 09:52, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a lengthy Google search for Minako Nishiyama only turns up announcements of minor exhibitions, but no indepth profiles of her as an artist, or even of the exhibitions themselves, except for news about a giant toilet shaped like a cake[[1]], and a paragraph in a book about one work.[[2]] Between what I found and what is in the article, there is insufficient sourcing to pass WP:GNG. A french Wikipedia article is likewise poorly sourced.[[3]] The Japanese Wiki site is inscrutable. Are there any accessible sources which demonstrate notability? TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:58, 22 March 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.