Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wall Hangings

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. Article clarified and sourcing improved; nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:06, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Wall Hangings

Wall Hangings (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)

Let me cite the "Impact" section: "The only national art world press that the exhibition received was commissioned" There appears to be a fundamental lack of independent coverage of this exhibition, and an attendant lack of notability. (As a distant second concern, this would need to be moved away from squatting on an extremely generic name) -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:48, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

User:Thebaconfairy The failure of the exhibition was to have the craft material artists recognized by the fine art world. There is/ was no question by the crafts world. The 2015 exhibition Fiber: Sculpture 1960-Present that was created for the Institute of Contemporary Art, and traveled to Wexner and Des Moines Art obliquely referred to the Wall Hangings exhibition: "With Fiber, Janelle Porter, the ICA's Mannion Family Senior Curator, has organized an exhibition of sweeping scope and substance, the first in four decades to assemble and address this art and these artists, until now under-recognized or long-forgotten." The exhibition referred to four decades ago is Wall Hangings- the list of artists have 10 overlaps, which is almost 1/3 of the newer exhibition and slightly more than 1/3 of the Wall hangings exhibition. In string, felts & thread (a prominent craft theory book) there is a section that discusses on the tactics employed by Elenor Constatine & Lenor Larsen and how it may have mitigated their intentions. —Preceding undated comment added 19:35, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

• Keep While I am not clear as to what distinction the article editor is trying to make by calling Bourgeois's article "commissioned," the fact remains that it appeared in Craft Horizons, the widely-circulated journal of the American Craft Council, a source independent of the Museum of Modern Art. While the show was not widely reviewed at the time, it's evident from the sources cited above and in the article, as well as in Virginia Troy's article in this volume that the show and MoMA's series of textile exhibitions in the 1950s and 1960s were essential to a broader cultural conversation about the place of craft in art museums. (The Bourgeois article is cited in note 52 of Troy's article.) All of these together constitute sustained, significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KR26740 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
• Keep. This exhibition may not have received much critical attention at the time, but has received it (in Elissa Auther's book) later, and is now considered significant because of the impact that it had on the reception and classification of Fiber art. Mduvekot (talk) 22:18, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
• Keep per Mduvekot's assessment of the long term impact. I removed the "commissioned" article language, as I think that is not relevant for this context, and quite a red herring: Elmidae it is conventional for magazines to pay for reviews that their writers do; in some cases these are staff writers, paid a salary; in other cases they are freelancers who have pitched a story; and in smaller instances they are articles which editors initiate by commissioning a writer to work on. In this sense, the commissioned articles are considered the highest priority by the editor of the publication, which is why I think Auther mentions it in her text:

"Regrettably, given the exhibition’s importance in the history of the American fiber movement, the only national art-world press Wall Hangings received was a review that Craft Horizons commissioned from sculptor Louise Bourgeois."

• Additionally, I found several peer reviewed texts from the last ~15 years that consider the legacy of the exhibition:
  • Fleetwood, N., Díaz, E., & Pepe, S. (2011). Reviews. Art Journal, 70(2), 112-121.
  • Tulokas, M. (2010). Auther, Elissa. String, felt, thread: The hierarchy of art and craft in American art. CHOICE: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries, 47(11), 2086.
  • Sorkin, Jenni. (2003). Way Beyond Craft: Thinking through the Work of Mildred Constantine. Textile: The Journal of Cloth and Culture, 1(1), 28-47.
  • Auther, Elissa. (2008). Fiber Art and the Hierarchy of Art and Craft, 196080. The Journal of Modern Craft, 1(1), 13-33.
  • Mcgown, K. (2016). Magdalena Abakanowicz at Art_Textiles, the Whitworth Gallery, Manchester, 10 October 2015-31 January 2016. JAWS: Journal of Arts Writing by Students, 2(1), 64. --Theredproject (talk) 03:36, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
• Comment All right, that seems pretty clear. I'll withdraw the nomination then. Cheers --06:03, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

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.