Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugues Claude Pissarro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 No Consensus. ---J.S (T/C) 22:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hugues Claude Pissarro

  • Delete claim to fame seems to be that he's the grandson of someone famous. Just H 16:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
I think that you should do some more research before making this allegation. "seems to be" is a weasel phrase. You are challenging another editor's work and should be more precise. Clearly this is a weak article, but let's look at a fix before we toss it out. --Kevin Murray 18:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Minor painter, there seem to be over a dozen Pissarro descendants who have been artists themselves. Found several short biographies but not truly independent sources, fails WP:BIO. --Dhartung | Talk 00:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
    • For example, he was not included in the 2000 exhibition "Camille Pissarro and his Descendants", so he's minor even in terms of the Pissarro family. [1] --Dhartung | Talk 00:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
You are absolutely wrong in your facts as well as judgmental in your conclusion of him being minor in his family; see [2]& [3] for evidence of his inclusion as H. Claude in the family exhibition. Please be more careful!. --Kevin Murray 18:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment This artist is also known as Hughes Claude Pissarro, H Claude Pissarro, and as Isaac Pomié. Further online research is yielding much good information, leading to a possible support for notability. Please reserve your choices until I can complete some research and rewrite --Kevin Murray 18:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Roughly 1,000 Google Hits for "Claude Pissarro"; 77 more as Isaac Pomie
  • Commissioned by White House to paint a sitting president - Eisenhower

NOTE This page has been extensively rewritten, and now meets notability guidelines with the following additonal information:

--Kevin Murray 19:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep Per establishment of notability above. --Kevin Murray 19:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Notability established. Nathanian 20:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Vote changed to weak keep weakest possible keep. Kevin Murray, there are two different exhibitions, and I was unable to connect him to the Ft. Lauderdale one. The different forms of his name and the pseudonym complicate the research task; I looked hard but only found gallery (i.e. not independent, because they make money when they sell paintings) sources for biographical information. Note that the Grace Art Gallery and Art News links are not independent, and the Humanities Web bio is substantially the same wording as his official gallery bio. It's my impression that this guy gets by on a family name and aggressive print marketing, but hey. --Dhartung | Talk 21:20, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I've looked high and low and I can't find a single museum that exhibits his work. I found a repeated claim that the Ashmolean had a work, but their website doesn't support that claim. His daughter Leila married into the Stern family, who run an international gallery business, so watch for connections to the Stern Gallery in sourcing. --Dhartung | Talk 21:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm even more convinced -- one of the few articles on Google News Archive that isn't a passing mention or a mistaken attribution (maybe people think that Camille was his wife!) was an article about an auction misrepresenting its objets d'art:
The Arts: Buckley auction artful reminder that buyers best be wary
The ad said that "Original Handsigned works by Pissarro - Chagall - Miro - Icart - Cezanne - Degas - Picasso - Renoir ...
The artist was not Camille, it was Hugues Claude, Pissarro's living grandson.
(That's all I got from the preview.) --Dhartung | Talk 23:30, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I couldn't verify any of the prizes he won oh-so-long-ago either. Two look like art fair awards, being held in Cannes notwithstanding, and the other -- the medaille d'or Leonardo da Vinci -- doesn't turn up in any searching, so who knows who gave it out. About the only thing left for notability is that painting of Ike. It isn't the official portrait and isn't in the government collection today as far as I can tell, otherwise it would be cataloged. Ike was an amateur painter and I can only assume he had it done for himself or it was arranged as a gift. --Dhartung | Talk 23:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • In the grand scheme of things what is the risk of letting this go? The evidence for and against is a bit shadowy, but we're not trying to get a felon off the streets, just publish an article.
  • If you'd read what I said above (from the beginning) you'll see that I've expended a lot of effort trying to find a good reason to keep. The more I searched, though, the "less" I've found. Not even one real gBooks mention (not surprising, given his dreadful pastiches of his ancestor's brilliance) -- two instances that are clearly mistakes where Camille was intended. --Dhartung | Talk 11:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  • As I said above "shadowy", but not compelling enough to drop the article. I think when it is this close, we just let it go, especially if it becomes impassioned. Judging the quality of his work seems beyond the scope of a AfD. --Kevin Murray 17:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Believe me, it isn't the quality of his work. For AFD purposes I'm simply troubled by the dearth of independent reliable sources. The quality of his work is an indicator why there are so few, e.g. no appearances in books covering modern impressionism or French painters of the 20th century. Even minor painters get name-checks from time to time. If you look at my contributions I engage in article saves all the time and I'm no automatic deletionist. I don't believe in deletion without at least giving an article's notability an opportunity to be established. I don't think that "letting it go" is really a good idea if there are serious questions. --Dhartung | Talk 21:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as per the excellent research of Dhartung. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:38, 27 December 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.