Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michel De Caso (2nd nomination)

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. By the looks of things, this one just gets over the line. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Michel De Caso

Michel De Caso (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. Tyrenius 02:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Not notable, due to insufficient non trivial, verifiable sources. Bus stop 23:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michel De Caso

• Comment. This was already deleted in 2005. If a page is recreated wihtout any noticable improvement, or additions to notability, isn't it a speedy delete? Freshacconci 00:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, that's true. I've checked deleted version. The difference now is that some refs and links are provided, which were completely absent before. I think it's best to let this AfD run its course. Tyrenius 02:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• Weak delete Artist does a great job chronicling his own achievements (exhibitions, awards, etc.), but I'm not seeing any references or assertions of notability that aren't published on the artist's own websites. I was going to mention that the entry on Rectoversion had been previously deleted as well, but Tyrenius is all over that. Planetneutral 02:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• I've just speedied it as nn, as there was no assertion of any wider repute and no refs provided. If this AfD turns out to be a keep, it may need to be revisited. Tyrenius 03:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

and I am in complete agreement with that. The difference, from what I gather by reading De Caso's own pamphlet is that he paints both sides of the object. That is neither new nor notable. I have a different opinion about the artist himself though... Alf^Photoman 22:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per Planetneutral - refs, and ghits all just seem to contain his own blurb, plus one "art critic" writing in same vein. Johnbod 04:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, sorry guys but this time we have slightly more than a self projector. There are multiple sources and critical reviews available, see artsgazette (sorry in French), London Town and related to that Entente cordiale show. This artist qualifies at least as footnote in art history Alf^Photoman 13:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
• keep I think what Alf has found is sufficient, if he puts the in the article.DGG 23:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, had nothing better to do (smirk). But you are right, I should do what I tell others to do... Alf^Photoman 23:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I still disagree - the Arts Gazette piece (online mag only I think) is written by himself, the London listing website serves up his own PR, & the Shepherd's Bush Gallery is not a prominent one. Notice how he is always a "renowned sculptor" everywhere. It's the same PR blurb reheated, as I said above. A professional artist certainly, but I don't see notability. Johnbod 00:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

My fault with the Art Gazette, should have read to the end... But the Entente is a recurring show that has nothing to do with De Caso but a French-English coproduction that happens every year with changing artists. Alf^Photoman 00:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Alf photoman, I don't think that the Entente is a recurring exhibition. It was timed in relationship to the centenary of the Entente Cordiale between France and England. The LondonTown website piece is the only non-self-referential source that we have, which does little more than establish that he exhibited there. Surely, there are other sources, no? Perhaps in the French news? I could be compelled to change my vote if something more surfaces, but as it stands, it fails WP:A. Planetneutral 00:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Mais certainement , look at the page, because of the Boo-hoo of the Art Gazette I went all out and got some references from some friends (who can't understand why I call them at 2 AM). Must format though but its 3 AM here, time to go to bed Alf^Photoman 01:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

• Comment, Sources: there are at least 10 more articles/critiques about him at L'Indépendant ( find it by going to the website/archives) but I took the most recent ones. Alf^Photoman 16:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I agree there is indication the person is a serious artist, with some degree of notability. But I don't think the Rectoversion page should stand as a separate article. Is there any indication it applies to anyone else? I think it should just be a part of the article on the artist. I didn't realize there was some notability there, when I nominated this. Bus stop 23:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

From what I have found no, except some students of De Caso there is nobody seriously claiming to be a Rectoversionist. He gives art classes and runs a webpage that claims being the portal of Inertational Rectoversionism, but except for him I have seen nothing of note there Alf^Photoman 23:34, 3 March 2007 (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.