Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nelda Ramos

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-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 04:21, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nelda Ramos

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article appears to fail WP:GNG. Perhaps others can prove me wrong. Thank you! Missvain (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 23:03, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - she has had shows internationally, see here in the Austin and there in Venice, both internationally significant art venues. Bearian (talk) 00:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added four more sources to the article that I found as well as added the Austin Exhibition photo source listed above. With the various references across several sources the subject now crosses the thresold of notability. I moved the primary sources that were listed at the end of the article to external links since they are primary anyways. WordSeventeen (talk) 02:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep article needs clean up and more sources, but seems notable. Jooojay (talk) 20:04, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems like good sourcing for an artist working in a non-english-speaking country. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Most of the references in the article are primary (by an exhibition space about their own exhibition), dead links (no longer mentioning the subject), or only mentioning the subject very briefly (e.g. the "Not easy togetherness" source). The one exception is the boladenieve site which appears to be both independent and in-depth. And the only exhibits of the artist's performance and works that the article discusses are an exhibit at a private gallery and a piece in a multi-artist show at the Mexic-Arte Museum, which don't seem to rise to the "substantial part of a significant exhibition" or "significant critical attention" clauses of WP:ARTIST. Which is to say, I don't think the article as it is currently written is enough to demonstrate notability. But there are other in-depth and independent sources to be found, for example [1] and [2]. So I think she does pass WP:GNG at least, and possibly also WP:ARTIST, but it would help to add better sources to the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:45, 26 March 2015 (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.