Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultra-Renaissance art movement

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 Delete - Yomangani^talk 15:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ultra-Renaissance art movement and related articles

A group of articles started by User:Sowff.

• Ultra-Renaissance art movement, 507 Google results -- none indicate notability, many are unrelated.
• Tom Marchione, 228 Google results, most of which are about an anthropologist employed at USAID
• Roy Zornow, 151 Google results, most of which are about Roy Zornow, an information architect
• Brently Comstock, two Google results, both from ultra-renaissance.com
• Mike Wrathell, 429 Google results, none of which indicate notability.

• User:Sowff, who self-identifies as Mike Wrathell, has provided some references about the article on himself. I will check these references and if necessary, create a separate AfD. For now, I withdraw the article Mike Wrathell from this list. However, nomination for other articles remains. utcursch | talk 13:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Delete all as non-notable. utcursch | talk 11:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• weak Keep Ultra-Renaissance art movement and merge the members into it. Then add cite. It is mentioned in an award-winning documentary and is mentioned in a few other places on the web. It is hard to judge where this type of thing stands in history because it looks like they are probably using irony of a sort to make themselves look less than they might be. We need citations and preferably a list of exhibitions. No one asked for the article to be improved before it went for afd, that seems problematic to me.--Buridan 13:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The reference to this "art movement" being mentioned in an "award winning documentary" is found only on the website of the movement. The "few other places on the web" include blogs (some of which belong to these "ultra-renaissance" artists[1]), forums where these artists introduce themselves asking people to visit their website[2] and websites, where anybody can register and create a profile[3][4]. Also, many of the results are not related to this particular movement[5], [6] (If I am wrong, please correct me by providing some credible links). The "no one asked for the article to be improved" argument is baseless, as the article was taggged for want of references[7], but the tag was removed by the author, who has provided only one source: the website of the "art movement". Also, may I please ask you to explain what do you mean by "using irony of a sort to make themselves look less than they might be"? utcursch | talk 09:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

• weak keep Although many of the links appear to be self-referencing, I tend to give them the benefit of doubt; To give the article body, the separate artists need to be merged into it; as a whole ring of articles on this theme is too much Arnoutf 13:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: the article doesn't say much about the 'art' and explains neither the "ultra" nor gives a clue about connection to Renaissance. A catchy name ... well, I googled that someone already invented term "hyper-renaissance". Pavel Vozenilek 23:45, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete All per WP:V, which clearly states "If an article topic has no reliable, third-party sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." -- Satori Son 01:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all unless Reliably sourced. User:Sowff self-identifies as Mike Wrathell, thus making this all autobiographical and vanity. (see Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Ultra-Renaissance art movement) User:Zoe|(talk) 04:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Mike Wrathell references of some note added to Ultra-Renaissance and his entry, including favorable review of "the king of pluto" on FilmThreat.com, cast member of a new film called "W," and Juror's Statement from an international art contest, with art elsewhere on the site of Upstream People Gallery.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sowff (talk • contribs) (creator of the articles)

Hi! Mike, None of the references provided by you have any information about Ultra-Renaissance art movement. Some of them are about the documentary film The King of Pluto, which according to you mentions the movement. Since you've provided some references about Mike Wrathell, I've removed from the list of articles nominated for deletion for now. utcursch | talk 13:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, kingboyk 16:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unless credible sources are provided. --kingboyk 16:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all, this smells like self-promotion - not the mention the lack of reliable sources for any claim to notability. Sandstein 21:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

• strong Keep Marcel Duchamp once said, "Art is whatever the artist says it is." I have provided enough notable references to show that I am a true artist and it is my right as an artist, like Duchamp, to be a member of an art movement. Thus, The Ultra-Renaissance, is also valid by all known standards of art history. Dada, or Dadaism, was created and coined by the artists within the art movement. Likewise is the case for The Ultra-Renaissance. Let me ask you this, you naysayers: are you not tired of not having heard of any new art movements since Pop Art? It has been nearly 50 years since an art movement of note was on the scene. I am trying to help the world by injecting art into the public discourse. I have achieved some notability with my art, as acknowledged, even, by some people here. It seems only fair and logical that my art movement should also be accepted here, much like Linus and his blanket. Can you really separate Linus from his blanket and still have the internationally-known character? Or Schroeder from his piano? The accusation that my entries are mere self-promotion after I supplied references of note seems to be hyperbolic. Art is an important thing, and if I am attempting to bring art more into the public consciousness, I do not find that the act of an ego maniac. I assure you "The Ultra-Renaissance" was mentioned in "the king of pluto," and would be happy to mail Wikipedia a complimentary DVD of the documentary. A work of art I made with the help of fellow Ultra-Renaissance artist Tom Marchione was exhibited at 4 Star Gallery in Indianapolis, IN titled "Ultra-Renaissance Fountain," which is an homage to Marcel Duchamp. By the way, B. W. C., Roy Zornow, and Tom Marchione are all present on the New York International Independent Film & Video Festival page for "the king of pluto" so I hope that qualifies as a reference of note for them as well as for me and The Ultra-Renaissance itself. I understand that you need to see references and will try in the future to see that more references are generated for Ultra-Renaissance art. However, there are enough to justify keeping this "ring" on your site. The Ultra-Renaissance is a valid, living art movement. I just made a work of art last night with Tom Marchione, in fact. The Ultra-Renaissance is also present in "W, or Strange Things Begin To Happen When A Meteor Crashes In The Arizona Desert" in a scene where I am thrown into a spaceship bound for Pluto. The two cowboys who toss me in the ship at the orders of "W" are wearing Ultra-Renaissance tee shirts with the name of the movement on them as well as an image drawn by myself and Brently Comstock, aka, B. W. C. Sowff 15:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Note: The user Sowff self-identifies as Mike Wrathell (founder of the "art movement"), and is creator of the article.

• I've already provided explanation here. utcursch | talk 10:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Self-promotion. WP is not a place to obtain notability. Pavel Vozenilek 17:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Pavel and WP:Auto. --TheOtherBob 22:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• ? I do not know how the issue of seeking notability has come up with a valid contemporary art movement. Are we to assume that all contemporary things are to be deleted since they may wish to obtain notability via WP? It seems like a downright blind acceptance of cynicism. I can appreciate a cynic, and always got a kick out Diogenes saying to Alexander, "Get out of my sunlight!" but I am also mindful of Nietzsche's axiom, "Greatness is being both cynical and innocent." If WP is to be a valid resource, I do not think the deletion of all contemporary references is in WP's best interest. WP's greatness is its very contemporary validity. To delete The Ultra-Renaissance art movement seems to be a step in the wrong direction. Sowff 04:17, 8 November 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.