Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Dawson


 * 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 keep. It seems to be WP:SNOWing, as non-keep voters (and the nominator) have been retracting their votes in droves as the article was improved. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:56, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Barbara Dawson

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO and WP:NPROF. Adjuct professor. Non-notable. Minor coverage.  scope_creep Talk  17:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note to closer – this BLP is not about a professor per se, so NPROF does not apply, even though she is an adjunct prof. This is a simple GNG that easily passes. This is the first female art gallery director of Hugh Lane Gallery, "the first known public gallery of modern art in the world." Not only is she a notable director, she is also a notable author, editor, and curator of highly notable art gallery exhibits.  Atsme 💬 📧 00:25, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:HEY - nice work !  Delete  - a non-notable academic. Does not meet criteria for notability for WP:NACADEMIC or WP:GNG. One of a series of articles by the same editor making articles on non-notable alumni awardees of the University College of Dublin. Possibility of a coi or upe, or just a fan of UCD? Netherzone (talk) 17:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Or possibly a new editor participating in an EDITATHON as part of a Dublin WP group, or university. It really is better to AGF. Look at this article now. Hopefully, the other articles you mentioned were not mistakenly deleted despite WP:CONTN and NEXIST or SNG, simply because no one took the time to fix it.  Atsme  💬 📧 13:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. No prejudice against moving to draft or recreating as a draft to build upon for the future. BD2412  T 17:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Withdrawing !vote per excellent rehabilitation effort by Atsme, and the expectation that more will be found along these lines. BD2412  T 22:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Changing to keep per continued addition of content. BD2412  T 01:26, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - I found the following sources, and this is just the beginning:
 * This BLP is quite notable as an author, and art director for an inner city municipal art gallery
 * Irish Echo and BBC added 00:25, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Lookthebusiness
 * Author
 * Irish Times
 * RTE Public radio interview
 * interview
 * Hugh Lane : founder of a Gallery of Modern Art for Ireland
 * Brooklyn Rail
 * We do not delete based on WP:CONTN and WP:NEXIST - this BLP just came back into main space. We can draftify but we get yelled at for draftifying. It will be expanded before this AfD is over.  Atsme 💬 📧 18:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi True. I saw several of them, when I did the before, but I still think it is below borderline. Most of them are primary.  Good work on finding the ones I missed. If you can find some book reviews, she may pass WP:NAUTHOR yet. Two would do it.   scope_creep Talk  18:08, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree, scope creep, but I really do have a good reason because it would have been much easier to simply delete, redirect or draftify. This lady truly is notable, and now I want to work on it. I first came across this BLP when my new grad from NPPSCHOOL,, posted about it at WT:NPP/R. My initial reaction based on his comments and the article's history, was to consider A7, but knowing better than to jump to conclusions (the only exercise I've been getting lately) I asked if he did WP:BEFORE. He is on a different time zone, so I wasn't expecting a quick response, and with that in mind, I decided to go ahead and do it myself. At least doing it that way I'd know which direction to guide him. As I already mentioned, this lady is quite notable as is the Hugh Lane Gallery, which according to the article, is "the first known public gallery of modern art in the world." Dawson is the first female director of that gallery, and being a first is notable in and of itself, but not quite enough, so I kept researching and finding books she authors, articles written about her, a public radio interview, and so forth. I had just started working on that article when I saw this AfD – and that is the long and short of it.  Atsme 💬 📧 18:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women,  and Ireland.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women artists.  Atsme 💬 📧 00:25, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect (no merge) to Hugh Lane Gallery. Head of a public art museum would seem to be more appropriate for WP:GNG or maybe WP:ARTIST notability than WP:PROF. I don't think the alumni award counts for much, and I can't find other evidence of independent notability through any of these criteria, but redirects are cheap. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , you might want take a look at the article now - and this is just a start. The woman is notable without question.  Atsme 💬 📧 21:36, 5 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep - I was assessing this article and turned to for assistance in determining how to go about it. I think we need to be careful of the halo effect (or in this case anti-halo). The article was in bad shape when it was moved to main. Personally I would not move an article to main in the state it was, it needed to be more complete and better sourced. The sources have been proved by Atsme to exist, and so for that reason I consider notability to be established. The article needs significant improvement, and I would encourage the article creator to move their article back to draft until it is more complete. However deletion is not appropriate. Thanks all. MaxnaCarta (talk) 23:07, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The sources that are mostly primary and there very little in the waay of real WP:SECONDARY sources to prove the Dawson is notable. I can't see one reference that give me confidence that she is notable. Lastly process doesn't define notability, only sources do and they are lacking.   scope_creep Talk  23:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I highly recommend that you read WP:PRIMARY. I just added another secondary source above, and will be citing it when I add more material to the article.  Atsme 💬 📧 00:25, 6 September 2022 (UTC)


 *  Weak Keep - As of right now the article needs further clean up and better sourcing but appears to meet GNG. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 00:49, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Strike out of "weak", Atsme and Bridget did a lot of clean up. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * In addition to ones other editors have recently added, I was able to add reviews in Irish Art Review of two publications she has coauthored. There is also this profile of her in The Phoenix (of which I have requested a copy at WP:REX). Bridget (talk) 02:04, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , I found the Irish Art Review in JSTOR, Reviewed Works: The Swiss Cottage by Sean O'Reilly; Glenveagh Castle by William Gallagher; The Casino at Marino by Sean O'Reilly; Medieval Church Sites of North Dublin by Mary McMahon; The Glebe House and Gallery by Francis Bailey. Review by: Barbara Dawson Irish Arts Review Yearbook Vol. 11 (1995), pp. 231-232 (2 pages) Published By: Irish Arts Review https://www.jstor.org/stable/20492847  Atsme  💬 📧 02:37, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Good find! So Dawson has also contributed to Irish Arts Review. Just to clarify my comment, I meant that I added two articles by other people (Mulcahy and Campbell) who reviewed one of her books. So I think they would help Dawson pass WP:NAUTHOR guidelines in addition to her other achivements. Bridget (talk) 04:30, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Atsme, who has found enough sources to push it over the edge of Notability. --GRuban (talk) 19:39, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Atsme....  Twopower332.1938 (talk) 02:03, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Atsme.--IndyNotes (talk) 16:01, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment The article I think is more than borderline notable. I'm willing to Withdrawn the Nomination, if its ok with everybody else.   scope_creep Talk  19:22, 8 September 2022 (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.