Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judd Tully

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. SoWhy 08:39, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Judd Tully (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)

From one side, when I search for him, there are hundreds of links, where he is author, but I didn't find a lot of information that maintains the notability claim as per WP:JOURNALIST. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 12:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Believe the author meets our notability guideline under WP:AUTHOR “…as a person being regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.” In looking at Google Scholar here[1] we can see Mr. Tully is a prolific author where his papers and books are being cited on an ongoing bases by other authors. In addition, when looking at were his work is being used we see an abundance of well-known and important academics using Mr. Tully’s work as referenced in the cites [2]. ShoesssS ^Talk 14:43, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – I understand reservations about his notability from an digital media perspective. His work has only been more recently making it online. However he is really a ubiquitous figure in the artworld, especially in regards to covering the art market. His oeuvre go back almost 35 years where he got his start writing with a lot of the early Contemporary Art Magazines and journals in 1970’s SOHO. I think the issue is maybe a chunk of his body of work is in print that has never been ported over to online sources. I’m working on digging some of those up and putting them here, but for now my entry is just a start.

1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.

   Tully is quoted widely and frequently as a source amongst established art critics. For example

   • Quoted by NY Times Critic Roberta Smith in an article about sculptor Donald Judd.
   • Referenced as source in NY times obituary of Art and Auction editor Bruce Wolmer.
   • Cited in NY Times by critic Benjamin Genocchio about the artist Reuben Kadish

2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.

   He was one of the first journalist to cover the rise secondary market as a significant place to store wealth and use price collusion.

   • Art and Auction Cover Feature on Price Collusion
   • Washington Post article for record Sale Sale of Van Gogh’s Irises in 1987

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.

   Tully has been writing for Cultural and Art outlets since the late seventies. Again a lot of these materials are extant as print and not digital. He has written for Flash Art, Art and Auction Magazine, New Art Examiner, ARTS Magazine, ART/WORLD, Horizons, Artnews and Artnet to name a few. He does have several monographs that are sought after including Red Grooms Manhattan Rukus and more recently Donald Judd solo show catalog at Mnuchin Gallery

4. 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.

   I think other two sections above help illustrate this.

User:Meenween ^Talk12:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:31, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:31, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

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.