Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Colen

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. - Bobet 16:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dan_Colen

Delete Reason...Clearly a vanity article created by this person or his art dealer for marketing or publicity purposes. Not noteworthy. TomPeters 19:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Nominator has made 13 edits, 7 of them for this AfD.Tyrenius 04:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts. Tyrenius 04:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Do you realise that "vanity" in itself is not a reason for deletion? How would you evaluate in notability terms a solo show at the Gagosian Gallery, 7 works in the Saatchi collection, inclusion in a "world renowned" show and being one of 30 artists in the forthcoming USA Today show at the Royal Academy in London? Tyrenius 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Dan Colen is not even on Gagosian's extremely large list of exhibited artists. [[1]]TomPeters 06:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• His show at the Gagosian Gallery is referenced in the article.Tyrenius 07:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Being exhibited at the Whitney Biennial [2] makes one a notable artist. Article could use some tone editing. NawlinWiki 20:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Delete WP:VAIN,WP:OR,WP:V - no problem with it being recreated, but there are perhaps two lines in the article that could be kept at the moment. If somebody wants to re-edit it and provide sources, I'll change my mind. Yomangani^talk 22:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

• I have edited and added main sources as required. Tyrenius 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - rewrite gives some evidence of notability and addresses my previous concerns. Yomangani^talk 09:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Winning the Bucksbaum Award would probably convey notability. The article says Whitney Biennial is for "lesser known" artists. That would argue against notability, as do only 500 Google hits. New York Times has this, and this. Hanging art in the loo sounds like a publicity stunt-- like creating a Wikipedia article could be. This reviewer panned the Whitney exhibition entry. Not sure how he rates against a fellow artist who spray painted a scatalogical expletive on a board and called it art. :) Dlohcierekim 03:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Inclusion in the Whitney Biennial is normally considered a considerable accolade. Your quote from the wiki article on it is highly selective. What it actually says is:

the Whitney Biennial is a world-renowned showcase for recent American art, typically by young and lesser known artists. The Whitney show is generally regarded as one of the leading shows in the art world, often setting or leading trends in contemporary art.

I trust you will excuse my bolding the description, in case anyone misses it this time. Tyrenius 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

PS not quite sure how some of your observations are relevant to the AfD... Tyrenius 05:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment There are over a hundred artists and art collectives in each Whitney Biennial. If inclusion implies notability, perhaps there should be a list of all participants at the Whitney Biennial entry. If I were to make such an edit would that be acceptable? TomPeters 05:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• I think it would be regarded as a useful resource for those wishing to track contemporary artists who are featured in world-renowned shows, and I would encourage more information on the arts, rather than less. Please do so. Tyrenius 02:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• I've just listed it on Wikipedia:Requests for expansion as it is disgracefully short for such a prestigious show. Tyrenius 04:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Cannot see that he is notable. :) Dlohcierekim 15:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Now I've recovered the full description of the Whitney Biennial, I hope it helps to establish that. :) Tyrenius 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Because the person is not notable.Marwatt 17:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• How would you evaluate, for example, a solo show at the Gagosian Gallery, exhibiting in a world-renowned show, and inclusion in the USA Today show? Tyrenius 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep This artist is exhibited and included in some of the most prestigious galleries and collections in the world, including the Gagosian Gallery and Charles Saatchi. He is one of only 30 artists featuring in the USA Today show in October, a collaboration between Saatchi and the Royal Academy, London. Google is mostly an inadequate guide to contemporary art. I have cut out the unsourced POV description in this article. Tyrenius 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I don't really think this artist belongs on this list of New York artists [[3]] he's just been added to, the other artists on there are much more established. It's premature to add him to a short list with Alexander Calder, Jasper Johns, Nan Goldin, Marcel Duchamp etc. And I believe Google is a good indicator of an artist's notability. There are many online resources for the arts, especially for the trendy New York art scene. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TomPeters (talk • contribs) . (Sorry) TomPeters 06:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• That's a discussion for the article, not this AfD. I've had problems before assessing artists using google. You haven't answered my questions under your nom. Tyrenius 06:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• About vanity not being a reason to delete? I thought it was a reason. I don't see how being included in recent enormous group shows, some of which have not even happened yet, proves his notability as an artist. TomPeters 06:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• "a solo show at the Gagosian Gallery, 7 works in the Saatchi collection ... and being one of 30 artists" are not "enormous group shows". Tyrenius 07:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep The Whitney is a prestigious venue and this artist deserves an article by this criterion if no other. Lgh 06:56, 7 September 2006 (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.