Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexandru Popp


 * 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. Two relists has not resulted in consensus. After reading through the discussion and searching for sources myself, I'm inclined to believe that a 3rd relist would probably not be fruitful. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 12:01, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Alexandru Popp

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can find no indication that this individual meets the WP:ARTIST criteria, or that he "has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject".

A word of caution for those seeking references: "Popp" is a relatively common Romanian name (yes, despite what the article says, he was Romanian, although born in the Arad area when it was part of Hungary). One "Alexandru Popp" who comes up repeatedly on Google Books was a businessman, for instance. - Biruitorul Talk 15:19, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 November 23.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 15:20, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 15:38, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:22, 23 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. As the deprodding editor noted, there are a lot of suggestive snippets at Google, GNews, and GBooks, but nothing obviously conclusive. I hope someone who can handle Romanian will wade through and comment on whether any of these appear to be of substance. Our hypothetical Romanian speaker might also have a look at the long untranslated text of the earlier version  that was (correctly) removed from the article, to see if there's anything in there to suggest that reliable sources may actually exist. (Maybe the nominator already did this, in which case I'd be interested in xis interpretation.)   GBooks includes an retrospective volume from the Museum of Art in Cluj-Napoca,  of which he was evidently a founder, but I'm not sure how much notability that conveys. --Arxiloxos (talk) 18:56, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * While Popp did not found the art museum - that institution dates to 1951, two years after his death - he did found (or at least was the first director of) the School of Fine Arts, now the Art and Design University of Cluj-Napoca. (This source, from the university's site, also informs us he'd made a name for himself on the faculty of the Moholy-Nagy University of Art and Design.) So there's that.
 * Given that one can't actually see and evaluate the full context of snippets, I'm a bit wary of appealing to them, but for the most part, looking through, I do only see his name as part of a series of names, rather than something more in-depth. Probably the greatest depth (and it isn't very deep at all) is this, which informs us he has two paintings at the Cluj art museum.
 * The original text of the article is also intriguing. On the one hand, it's from Scînteia, the Romanian Communist Party equivalent of Pravda, and it's from 1983, by which time the Ceaușescu regime was veering from slightly more objective historiography to a more concertedly propagandistic tone. On the other hand, it purports to be by the highly respected Raoul Șorban, and I can't say there are any red flags (no pun intended) in terms of ideological content.
 * I think this is one of those cases where notability is swirling just beneath the surface, but nothing definite (yet) to clinch it. - Biruitorul Talk 21:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:24, 24 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak delete (as deprodder). I agree with Biruitorul's judgement that this is right on the borderline, but ultimately I don't think there's enough coverage out there for the article to be viable. I worry that systemic bias is at play, since it's totally possible that a Romanian- or Hungarian-speaking editor with access to a library in one of those countries could find sources, but in the absence of any evidence of those sources existing it's hard to advocate keeping this. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 11:28, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Keep, found one more source and added it to the article, now working with it. In combination with what Biruitorul found this should be enough to demonstrate notability.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:15, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I can't read most of the hits for his name on Google books, both because of the language and from not being previewable, but what's there seems to be mostly about the subject (rather than other people with his name, although there is some of that too) and enough to convince me that he's notable. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment/question: can someone clarify whether the source found and added by Biruitorul Ymblanter is satisfactorily independent to indicate notability? As far as I can tell it's a program/promotional material for an exhibition including Popp, and if he were alive I'd be inclined to say that was a problem, but since he's dead probably not so much? – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 06:17, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You probably mean the source added by me? It is indeed a catalogue of an exhibition of a number of Romanian (specifically I believe Timisoara) artists, all dead long before it was held, organized by the local university, apparently by a university professor who studies their art. In this sense, it is not really independent, in the same way as e.g. a commentary on Shakespeare by a Harvard professor studying the tragedies of Shakespeare would not be independent, and there is probably a bit of promotion involved, but I do not see any financial interests here. I think by our standard this would pretty much count as an independent source.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:56, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops, yeah, now corrected. And I agree, I think. On the one hand, WP:GNG's provisions relating to independence would seem to rule out sources like this, but then again it's ambiguous and there's really no reason why they should. It just seems odd that if, say, Damien Hirst were to die tomorrow, a bunch of otherwise unusable sources would suddenly become usable (and indicative of notability) despite the content probably not being any different? – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 08:26, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Tomorrow probably not, but I would say if in five years his manager (assuming he has one) will convince Tate Modern to have a personal exhibition, yes, we could use the catalog of that exhibition as a reliable source.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:33, 14 December 2013 (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.