Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Vatican Splendors

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000(talk) 17:50, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Vatican Splendors[edit]

The Vatican Splendors (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
User:Danny lost ("Trespassers william") nominated this article for deletion more than a week ago, but due to a complicated series of history moves and problems with the code, I've asked and gotten his permission to delete the AFD and start all over again. The nomination got no input until a few hours ago, so it was relisted today. Danny's rationale is as follows:

PR. Minor old tour, hardly any media coverage.

Below the deletion sorting, I've reproduced the vote that got added a few hours ago. I'm completely neutral on this discussion. Nyttend (talk) 04:05, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Google searches yield plenty of hits (82,800 or 35,900 or 7,860 depending), indicating notability. The exhibit set attendance records in at least one of the cities it toured. The article has a start on being well-referenced. It admittedly needs work to minimize the tourist brochure/PR prose (which I will start on soon), but it contains information I never knew, e.g., Italian law prohibits historic art pieces being outside Italy for more than 12 months at a time; some of the objects exhibited had never been out of Italy before; some of the exhibit items are not even on display in Rome when they're in Rome, etc. --71.178.50.222 (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the end of the original nomination. Please continue to add comments below. Nyttend (talk) 13:30, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Further comments by IP 71.178...: After the article survives this AfD, it needs to be renamed Vatican Splendors, without the, definite article. A little research shows the exhibit has been around since 2007–2008 and has appeared in Cleveland, St. Paul, St. Petersburg, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Ft. Lauderdale in the USA. It is now apparently exhibiting in Sao Paulo, Brazil. No exhibit containing the relics of Sts. Peter and Paul, some Giottos, some Berninis, a Guercino and the Mandolin of Odessa Mandylion of Edessa could be described as minor. Along with the press releases of the exhibitor (Evergreen) and info from the website vaticansplendors.com, there is a 160 page catalogue/guide to the exhibit available from booksellers listed at Amazon.com. There are also very likely newspaper articles about the exhibit from the visited cities (a quick search at the Cleveland Plain Dealer website shows 15 mentions of VS). PS: Thanks, Nyttend. --71.178.50.222 (talk) 13:46, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources of significant touring exhibition. Candleabracadabra (talk) 14:45, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Dedicated coverage in multiple secondary sources. Binksternet (talk) 16:30, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment User:71.178.50.222 asked me if the original article had a talk page. I'm not seeing any pages that existed on this subject, other than the current one — in other words, there can't have been any talk pages except Talk:Vatican Splendors and Talk:The Vatican Splendors, and nobody's ever created either of those. Perhaps the question meant to ask if the previous AFD had a talk page? That, too, doesn't seem to have existed. Nyttend (talk) 22:42, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Nyttend. In my experience, an article without a talk page is very unusual, so I sort of assumed that there was one that just got lost in the shuffle. No big deal; we'll start a talk page. --71.178.50.222 (talk) 04:28, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep :). Glad to see I have something to learn about seeing beyond the press releases. Roll on. trespassers william (talk) 13:54, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You da man, Danny-william! (You'll get your reward in Heaven). --71.178.50.222 (talk) 16:19, 15 January 2014 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Vatican_Splendors&oldid=1138859711"