Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artspace in Richmond, Virginia


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Artspace in Richmond, Virginia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Spotted this while checking links in another article I AfD'd. Fails WP:NCORP, WP:NONPROFIT. It's a run of the mill local organization for local causes. It is full of unsourced contents and contents sourced from sources that don't meet WP:RS and given the local nature, I don't feel sources exist that satisfies NCORP. Graywalls (talk) 18:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 18:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 18:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 18:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


 * comment while the article looks rather nicely written, the sources fail the WP:NORG criteria. Style Weekly is a local source. The books don't pass WP:AUD, so on. Graywalls (talk) 01:23, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Subject fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. This is another of 's articles where she has a CoI. (She mentions herself in the article but doesn't make the required disclosures.) She was clever in writing this because she piled-up a bunch of mere mentions in local papers. Much of the drive-by coverage is actually about the art exhibits but generally nothing about the Artspace, per se. Some of the citations are from the subject. I saw one citation from Virginia's tourism website. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 00:07, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete based on current article state. This kind of local artist's society is rarely notable. The article itself needs TNT.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:22, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Frankly I looked at the article & thought, wait, well-sourced, well-organized, cogent, what's the problem again?  But the more I clicked into Mitzi.humphrey's work, it became obvious she's produced a raft of COI problems, and refused to curb her poor habits after repeated warnings.  This article is thorough and detailed coverage -- cruft -- of a non-notable local art gallery.  I regret the wasted effort on her part but the article doesn't belong here.  --Lockley (talk) 20:08, 17 June 2020 (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.