Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Sabuneti


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Anthony Sabuneti

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD'd and dePROD'd earlier today.

Original PROD reasoning: Searched Google, GBooks, GNews, AllAfrica.com, and found nothing about this sculptor except profiles on commercial art sales sites. The ref given in the article is a good example of the kind of unreliable sources I found - it's a group that sells sculptures so it has a direct commercial interest in the subject and is therefore not independent. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. (This article is also a somewhat apparent paraphrase of the source, but not quite enough that I was comfortable G12ing it).

De-PROD'd after the addition of three sources. I am of the opinion that they don't indicate that the subject meets NARTIST at all. The two sources from the Herald (via AllAfrica.com) are simply mentions of his name in the context of other things. The one from news day spends all of two sentences mentioning the subject. It's not enough to keep an article.

Merely exhibiting, even in one notable museum, doesn't meet point 4 of NARTIST; the exhibit itself has to be significant. Otherwise the works have to be permanently in the collection of several notable galleries or museums. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:21, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment I added the references and removed the PROD. I have concerns about finding information on individual sculptors from Zimbabwe. The permanent collection of the National Gallery of Zimbabwe is not searchable online, as the national galleries of many countries are. International exhibitions are often reported in the media of the countries visited as simply 'Shona Art', with far more of the article expended on the organisers of the trip than the artists. The artists' names may be spelled in different ways, making searching difficult. Zimbabwe itself has been dangerous to visit for many years, media has not been independent, and it is not a place which outsiders are likely to visit to write about the artists. So it is hard to see how the significant coverage of prominent sculptors (or other professionals) is going to be found. If the articles that do mention them state that certain artists are notable, and have inspired others, or the artists have been exhibited internationally, that is evidence that they are notable. It may be worth digging in the permanent collection indexes of major galleries outside Zimbabwe, to see what Zimbabwean sculpture they have and whether they have recorded the artists' names. I don't know whether there have been previous discussions on this or similar topics, but I think that these artists deserve more than a PROD. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:37, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * it is hard to see how the significant coverage of prominent sculptors (or other professionals) is going to be found - I rest my case. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:41, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Zimbabwe-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:05, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete The argument that this is a "dangerous" country (it's not much more dangerous than many other parts of Africa), and that it lacks media coverage as a country because of economic inequality or lack of development etc. is beside the point. There's a policy for this, which I cannot remember, but essentially it says we are not here to address world inequalities. You either have the sources or do not; we are blind to social, economic or developmental conditions on the ground. (Additionally, I can easily read hundreds of recent articles written by independent publications in and out of Zim, so I am not sure what the comment above is about.) What is relevant to this discussion is the fact that that sources are not available for this artist to support his notability. I saw one in Google books and not much more elsewhere. GNG fail based on lack of independent reliable sources.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'd like to hear the opinion of someone from Zimbabwe. Is it likely this person is covered in undigitized Zimbabwean sources? Many African countries have very little of their local media digitized. It might just take a trip to a local library there. Kaldari (talk) 18:39, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep while continuing to source more information. Having work displayed in the National Gallery is nothing to sneeze at, it's already clear that he's shown internationally from the EU to South Korea, and the News Day source alone gives decent information about him specifically, including some biographical details. That's no small feat for a sculptor from Zimbabwe, and so should be enough to meet NARTIST 4b, substantial part of a significant exhibition, since "significant" should be considered in context. I expect what RebeccaGreen and Kaldari are suggesting is not to right great wrongs, but simply consider the context of sources created about Zimbabwean individuals. If he was an artist from the US or UK, you might expect more significant coverage in more sources, but for a Zimbabwean artist, significant mention in online sources is much rarer, and since someone has already found a few I'd expect more sources to be uncovered with more time and digging. Siko (talk)   —Preceding undated comment added 22:18, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I would argue that a "significant" exhibition is one which is independently notable, which none of his exhibitions seem to be. The two sentences in Newsday may provide information about him, but they hardly constitute significant in-depth coverage. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:10, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I see what you're getting at, but I note that we do not have notability standards based on the cultural, economic or social development of a city or country. To do so we would have to have a policy (we don't have one) or each editor would have to exercise a subjective scale in interpreting sources, depending on the development of the country (we don't do that). The fact of the matter is that unless you are a Zimbabwean curator or museum director who is familiar with the scene there, an individual can't really gauge his notability. This is why we rely on independent RS: to eliminate the guesswork and notability handicapping that you suggest above, and to keep a minimum of objectivity in the process. We don't need to make assumptions about the state of a country, or to make arguments for why the person might not show up int he press. We just need to assess and count the sources. Zimbabwe itself has plenty of reliable source publishers that can be found online, but unfortunately this artist does not show up in them frequently enough to be considered notable.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:49, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:57, 3 December 2018 (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.