Talk:The Elephant House

Meets notability guidelines.
If you don't think this is notable, then ya'll better nominate almost every single WikiProject Public Art article for deletion. I've expanded this. It is locally notable and has received multiple reliable source coverage in: If this isn't considered notability then I don't know what is. Large sculptures like this have articles around the world. I'm being bold and removing the notability tag. Thanks. SarahStierch (talk) 19:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Torontoist
 * Metro International
 * Freshdaily
 * The National Post
 * Toronto Sun
 * Just because it makes the news does not make it notable. Being written about in a news paper happens every day for many man made things. If the art is not found in a reputable art sources I dont think its notable at all. And the fact as seen here the names is used by a much more famous sculpture that has been written about in art books - not as a novelty news story.Moxy (talk) 21:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * According to notability guidelines we just need coverage in multiple reliable sources. And trust me, most public art isn't written about in reliable or notable art coverage - public art is a sorely under covered area (hence why we created WP:Public art). I can't really taken this as a legitimate argument. There are hundreds of artworks that have the same title around the world - naming conventions and titles don't matter. For example Benjamin Franklin (Boyle) and Benjamin Franklin (Jouvenal). I'm sorry, I just can't agree with this. :( Feel free to nominate it again, I just...can't understand why people care so much -it's a public artwork, it's notable in Toronto and has received coverage in the local publications. I do know it was featured in the book Utopia. The State of the Arts: Living with Culture in Toronto but I haven't been able to acquire a copy. ARghhhhh.... /me sighs SarahStierch (talk) 21:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you're not aware of the wikipedia guidelines and policies regarding information to be included in the encyclopedia. Just because an editor "knows" something is "true", that is not enough include info without reliable sources: "Its content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors." There's many topics that aren't included, besides lawn art in Toronto - just imagine if Toronto sources weren't in English. Please see Verifiability, wikipedia policy.
 * How does a bunch of outdoor elephants at roadside attractions verify this article as an installation of public art?
 * "the white elephant is a lawn ornament one can never forget."
 * This source is a blog
 * If you look at Torontoist, you'll see it redirects to the Gothamist LLC is the operator (or in some cases franchisor) of eleven city-centric blogs worldwide that focus on news, events, food, culture, and other local coverage.
 * Please see the Notability guideline.
 * Etc. There is no support that this is an installation of "public art", notable on some level. Needs some experts on public art weighing with their published opinions. It's not based on "trust me".   MathewTownsend (talk) 22:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not going to renominate this but you cant honestly put Benjamin Franklin (Boyle) and Benjamin Franklin (Jouvenal) sculptures in the same category as a spray painted plywood elephant on some guys front yard. That said I am not familiar with notability of Art here on wiki (the project has no advise page). I would classify this as a "news novelty" WP:NRVE "No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists: The evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest".Moxy (talk) 22:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Conversation about this sculpture on my talk page
FYI: User_talk:SarahStierch -- SarahStierch (talk) 21:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)