Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Anton
- 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. Withdrawn. Yunshui 雲水 07:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Peter Anton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
Non-notable artist. I've cleared some extensive copyvios which go back to the first version of this, 11 years ago. What's left is pretty close to WP:G11 material. My own searching failed to come up with any good sources. Fails WP:ARTIST, unless you consider sculptures of oversized candy to be a "significant new concept". Given the author's editing history (i.e. WP:SPA), I'm assuming this is also a case of WP:UPE, or possibly WP:AUTO. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:30, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Withdrawn. I disagree with the consensus, but it's inevitable that this will be kept, so we can save some time. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:32, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 00:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 00:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep there is no notability issue here. For starters the nominated article included nine sources, although not inline. I had no trouble finding seven more to place inline, one of which is a collection. He claims four other collections. There is lots of coverage and he is in one confirmed permanent collection, and likely more. So, take your pick, meets WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST. Also, if you want to see the really good minimalist candy art, check out the famous candy piles of Felix Gonzales-Torres.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:47, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- PS I do agree that it is probably an autobio. Eleven years of a single SPA editing it! That account should be blocked for being WP:NOTHERE. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:03, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep passes GNG --Spacepine (talk) 02:32, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per both above, regardless of the origins of the article. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:37, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Comment I still don’t see general notability here. Trillfendi (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep his works are represented in several museum collections. Vexations (talk) 11:33, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep - assuming every source is true, he's been in really major art exhibits (e.g., Art Basel) and featured in major magazines (e.g., Forbes). That passes WP:CREATIVE for me. Bearian (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per reasons given above. —Bobbychan193 (talk) 23:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keepfor all reasons above but just wanted to say it is chilling to see someone who doesn't understand the cultural consensus of major shows, museum collections, reviews in journals as passing against the small minded opinion that " oversized candy" isn't significant. like it or not wiki has become a major source for cultural research and the thought that folks who know nothing about the field might have the power to delete a minor but meaningful artist from the record is sad.Lblackcloud (talk) 22:44, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- No one is exercising power to delete without discussion here. Roy Smith nominated, and he withdrew it when concensus became evident.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:48, 8 August 2019 (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.