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.
Does not meet
WP:ARTIST, the only source in the article is his own book. Does not meet any of the four parts of WP:ARTIST.
Rusf10 (
talk) 01:25, 22 April 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm sorry that
Rusf10 hasn't taken up my invitation. Meanwhile,
in SFMoMA collection,
show at the Tang museum,
eight-minute video on PBS,
in Madison MoCA collection,
written up at ArtForum,
in the Getty collection ... oh and finally (for now) a
short and uninteresting paragraph that's both bilingual and ALL IN CAPITALS and therefore must be important, amirite? ¶ Sorry, I have trouble taking this AfD seriously. The nomination asserts: "Does not meet any of the four parts of WP:ARTIST". Let's just look at the fourth of
these: "The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." Not entirely sure about (a), but he seems to me to meet (b), (c) and (d); an achievement that I think is enough for us to be able to ignore the first three "parts". --
Hoary (
talk) 04:15, 22 April 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.