Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rivington Arms

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 Keep. Delete arguments were based on apparent lack of notability. Keep argument was that notability is established through its presence at certain shows, e.g. Frieze Art Fair, which is one of the top art venues in the world and to which leading galleries are only invited by a jury. Please note WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a convincing argument. The article certainly needs attention and I hope the editors wishing to keep it will do some work on it. Tyrenius (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rivington Arms

Rivington Arms (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)


  • Delete- This is not a promotional space for an art gallery.---Iconoclast Horizon 01:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete: Does not appear to be notable. 15,000+ ghits but they seem to be even listings on forums, and others are not related to this specific venue. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not notable. Agree with above.Metal Head (talk) 03:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. —Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 17:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Most of the 109 in Category:Contemporary art galleries are less notable than this, which exhibits at several important shows and has 3 blue-link artists. There is a case for a massacre of this category, but as things are, this should stay as the article, though poor, asserts notability successfully. Johnbod (talk) 17:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Question about notability, esp. for a gallery only established in 2001. JNW (talk) 03:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Johnbod's point re: the entire category has merit. I noticed at least one gallery in this category that opened in 2006 (!). Distinctions can be made between established museums for contemporary art, galleries of notable repute, and those that are trying to establish themselves, and are enjoying a little free promotion. JNW (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Johnbod (talk) this article needs lots of improvement though. Category:Contemporary art galleries does need to be thinned and edited at the very least, although there are certain museums and historical inclusions there that still have merit. Modernist (talk) 14:49, 23 November 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.