Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BerriBlue


 * 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. Consensus appears clear that BerriBlue is not yet notable as defined here. If someone would like a copy to work on in draft space, just let me know. Star  Mississippi  02:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

BerriBlue

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

The artist has only minor exibitions, to soon, SPA JakubDeWisniewski (talk) 11:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC) Wil57 (talk) 08:06, 1 February 2022 (UTC) - Hey guys, I came back to look at this since I got an email about it. My original intention was to create a couple of articles about street artists in Porto, but I never really got beyond this one and a draft about another artist, Hazul. I would love to return to the project and finish off a couple more articles, so it would be a shame if this one was deleted. Could you please explain what changes I should make? I understood from the comments so far:
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 January 31.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 11:57, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. JakubDeWisniewski (talk) 11:49, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete that she is selling her silk scarves, which are definitely not "merchandise" at Wolf & Badger is, I suppose, just an extension of her art practice and totally encyclopaedic content that really belongs in an article. Or not, and it's just blatant advertising by or on behalf of an artist with no work in museum collections or any other of the notability criteria that we have for visual artists, and no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Vexations (talk) 14:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NARTIST. She has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. Seems more like WP:PROMO. The creating editor created only BerriBlue article. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * the scarves section should be removed because it's promo (I checked Wolf&Badger and they are no longer there, only on the artist's site and a couple of small retailers, so I agree that it should go.)
 * Also that the artist isn't in museums - for street art I don't know how that can work really - if you walk around Porto or Lisboa you will see that the works are everywhere, but how should I note that?
 * Do I need more sources?
 * p.s. Sorry if the format is wrong here, I'm new to this!

The problem is that the artist is not yet notable to be included in English wiki, even her works "are everywhere". Please take a look at biographies of other street artists Hense,Banksy, Keith Haring and compare exhibitions. Perhaps submitting the article to Polish wiki, where standards of inclusion are not that strict is an option worth exploring.--JakubDeWisniewski (talk) 09:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Porto is famous for its decorated buildings. There is a long tradition of tiled and painted facades. There is a good chance for this artist to be really successful there. I would keep the article. Of course it should be corrected. It should be more neutral. I think it would be important to know her real name and other personal data. With a bit of good will one can even ask her about these pieces of information. There is no harm if the article is kept. New information is going to be added in the future. There is no harm in helping young artists. They have a calling or they have simply choosen a profession that makes living utterly difficult. Mirabella (talk) 07:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * keep passes WP:GNG  "!vote" added at 11:21, 1 February 2022 (edit) by 
 * Question for JakubDeWisniewski. In your nomination, you write . Are you saying that the creator was/is an SPA, and that creation by an SPA is grounds for deletion? -- Hoary (talk) 12:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment References 2, 9, 11, 12 and 15 are to her website, and other refs are weak. David notMD (talk) 13:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - It is WP:TOOSOON for this street artist to have an encyclopedia entry. There needs to be independent significant coverage in RS to meet WP:GNG. After examining the sourcing, I find that even though there are a lot of refs listed in the article which makes it "appear" to be substantial coverage, they are not quality sources. The sourcing consists of blog posts, pieces that do not have an author byline (probably paid PR, native advertising or modified press releases) and primary sources such as her own website or user-submitted content. In other words, promotional. She does not meet notability criteria for WP:NARTIST; she has had few exhibitions at non-notable galleries, but no museum shows nor collections, no reviews in notable art magazines or journals. Netherzone (talk) 14:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete No indication of being notable, fail to launch. (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scopecreep (talk • contribs)
 * Keep As the name shows street art is a genre for the people on the streets. For a street artist is much harder to get an opportunity to exhibit their work within the official network of art institutions. Suffice it to refer to Banksy’s career, and it’s clear how pointless it is to object that the artist hasn’t been featured in renowned galleries or museums yet. Under these circumstances it is a notable enough achievement that her works have been exhibited in several countries. (Poland, Ireland, Portugal). As the references prove, she gets attention form the audience.


 * Delete- " There is a good chance for this artist to be really successful there", "There is no harm in helping young artists" - these are not arguments to keep the article, otherwise Wikipedia should keep all the emerging artists. They are many outlets, where an artist can put thir bio and works, and there is no shame of not having a Wikipedia article. She may become notable in a few years, but at this moment is too soonJakubDeWisniewski (talk) 09:28, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I would be careful deleting young artists. I'm not an artist but I led an online gallery for a very long time in the old days when online presence of artists and galleries was rare. You never know in advance who is going to be remembered. However it is worth keeping in mind that young Attila József was expelled from the university by Antal Horger, rector of the university, for a poem that seemed to be a bit radical. He is in my opinion by far the best poet in the history of Hungary. On the other hand nobody... literally no-one would remember Antal Horger except because of Attila József. I think today people, most of all professionals of the art market, are interested in these young artists rather than in those established ones you can read about in every art history book. Mirabella (talk) 11:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, delete it if you will, but I mentioned arguments to keep it as well. She has already exhibited in at least 4 countries. I don't know whether you have an idea how difficult it is to get an opportunity to exhibit your works abroad... most of all as a street artist. Kolja Kramer Fine Arts exhibited street art in Vienna but it is a rare exception. The gallery was short-lived. The article was written by someone who has no other connection to the artist as wanting to write about street art in Porto. Self-promotion is excluded. On the other hand, I have to say, that even self-promotion would be a good sign. Today nothing else matters than promotion. You can sell an untouched dirty canvas it your PR is in order.
 * Delete - meets neither WP:GNG or WP:NARTIST.  Onel 5969  TT me 19:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:NARTIST. Spleodrach (talk) 20:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - I hope I'm allowed to vote to keep my own article - sorry if not! I've tried to read these comments and understand.
 * I removed the whole section on scarves, because I agree that can be considered promotion or merch.
 * I think that Mirabella's point about street artists not generally having many exhibitions is really important.
 * I disagree with the comment about only including street artists on the level of Banksy or Keith Harring. Those are the absolute top of the game, but there's a big difference between one of the main street artists in a large city / country and a total unknown. It's like saying we should only have musician articles about Led Zeppelin and Abba, and no one who isn't as big as that.
 * I think this passes WP:GNG because there are a number of secondary sources including books, magazines, auction catalogues, and large national newspapers. It does specifically say these can be in any language, so I also object to the comment that the article should go in the Polish wiki, because the standards are lower. It sounds a bit elitist about the EN wiki to be honest. :/
 * I'd really appreciate any help on the correct citations - I know I cited the artist's own website in a few places so they should be removed right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wil57 (talk • contribs) 13:26, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I undestand that you support her art, but writing an entry on Wiki to soon, is not a good idea. Tagging experienced Polish wikipedians to take a look Piotrus,Adamt — Preceding unsigned comment added by JakubDeWisniewski (talk • contribs) 15:20, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete- The auction catalogues come from "Desa aukcje młodej sztuki" a vanity event with no curatorial selection. There is no museum commissions, works in collections, residencies, critical texts about the artist. Lack of Portuguese of Polish wiki-she has not been recognized locally (red flag). Plus, your nickname sounds too similar to Willim, husband of the artist...
 * Wil57 (talk) 18:18, 3 February 2022 (UTC) Uff okay guys, I do disagree but getting a bit too much bother to be honest, which is a pity. Last thing I can think to do is email BerriBlue directly - I can ask about whether the auction is curated (I don't think it's a paid event). Is that any use, or am I wasting my time?
 * On the name - ha I see that, unfortunate!

Since the artist lived in Poland only until she was 13 years old, why should be an article about her in Polish Wikipedia first? Mirabella (talk) 08:07, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * - I'd say it would be a waste of your time to email the artist to find out whether or not the auction was "curated". Auctions exist to sell art or other collectable things, they are not a reliable source, and info from the artist would be primary sourcing which does not contribute to notability. "Curators" in an auction house are different that museum curators. In reading some of the comments above, I just want to say, that there are folks here who are not only interested in the work of younger emerging artists, they are deeply interested in the "next generation". However articles on emerging artists still have to be vetted through the Wikipedia guidelines and policies of verifiability, reliable sourcing independent from the subject, significant coverage over a period of time, etc. This is why I believe it is WP:TOOSOON for this artist. Is she promising, yes! Interesting, yes! Talented, yes! But the encyclopedia does not exist to advocate, help nor promote the next best thing; rather it is about what is in the historical record in verifiable, high-quality news, journal, and book secondary sources that are independent of the artist. It takes a while to learn all these guidelines and policies, so please understand that as much as many of us "support" young artists (I've spent a lifetime doing that thru my job) there are criteria for WP notability that multiple editors agreed upon thru consensus, over years of discussions. Wil57, please don't take this discussion personally. She sounds amazing. If it ends in deletion, which is likely, perhaps in a few years enough will have been written about her that could support an article. With best regards, Netherzone (talk) 21:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment JakubDeWisniewski’s remark about Polish Wikipedia lacks political correctness and reflects the Western belief, unfortunately still present today, that anything that is not the result of Western European or American civilization can only be inferior. I can assure you that is not the case.


 * Please don't assume or claim that the participants in this discussion believe that "anything that is not the result of Western European or American civilization can only be inferior". I don't believe that at all. Vexations (talk) 15:51, 6 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Answer My remark was related to (citation): Perhaps submitting the article to Polish wiki, where standards of inclusion are not that strict is an option worth exploring.--JakubDeWisniewski (talk) 09:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC). As I'm Hungarian, I tend to take everything as an offence that is likely to hurt Polish people. We have kind of a common history. It may not have been intended the way it sounds. Still I have experienced many times in my life this covert contempt that made me sensitive. Excuse me. I think, everything has been cleared and there isn't any further problem to settle. Mirabella (talk) 13:18, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Update Hey everyone, a few things - I have reached out to BerriBlue by email and asked her for help with some of the citations. She has copies of some of the physical books and newspapers cited, so I've asked for scans to verify them. Wil57 (talk) 20:24, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Just to let you know where I stand, I am trying to find only good sources to reference. This artist has had work featured in books on street art, national newspapers, and on TV, as well as exhibitions internationally over the course of 10 years. I'm hoping that counts for something. I'm also quite busy in real life, so could someone please let me know the deadline I have to work with here?
 * Thanks to Netherzone for your comments, I'll try not to take it personally (hard when you put loads of work into something, as I'm sure you all have experienced before), I do understand that certain boxes need to be ticked and that is fair. However, if my last attempt at proving notability through secondary citations doesn't work, I suggest taking a look at how street artists are measured as opposed to regular "gallery" artists. There are certain boxes that can't really be ticked, and if BerriBlue isn't considered notable, then none of the other Portuense street artists would be either, which is quite upsetting to people in Porto since it's part of our contemporary culture. (Also to me personally, since this whole thing started as a project where I would write up on the top 3 or 4 artists from Porto.)
 * Regarding the points made above, I don't believe that it was intended as such, but it did really come across that the EN wiki is the more correct version, and that the fact that something was missing from the "lower" PT or PL versions meant it wasn't worthy of the "higher" EN version. Again, totally don't think it was intended that way, but please take note of the potential for being read as such.
 * Question -, may I ask...would you happen to have a connection to the artist? The reason for this question is that I can't understand how it is that you were able to take the close-range photograph of her and upload it as your own work? I can understand with the two images of her street art that you could have encountered and photographed them in Porto. But the infobox image is obviously a posed shot. Please explain when you find a moment. Netherzone (talk) 17:08, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Wil57, is a husband of an artist Willim, not only because of a brillant choice of a nickname. He has edited only her entry, he's an English native speaker, there is no Portuguese or Polish version because no one outside of the author care to write about her (if she's notable/popular in Porto someone would have written it in Portuguese), he uploaded her picture, ( +we can check the metadata here and meta from her website) and he cares too much for a stranger using here a weasel language i.e "exhibitions internationally over the course of 10 years" to make her seem more notable than she is right now. Maybe Berriblue herself is watching him writing this. Anyway, COI and most importantly TOOSOON --JakubDeWisniewski (talk) 19:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Wil57 has denied COI, but has been asked on the Talk page of the article to explain who was the photographer of the three images. If Wil57, feels like COI (the second image is described as in a private collection, not street viewable). If not Wil57, then copyright violation. David notMD (talk) 19:27, 7 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment Ref #11 (Singleart), appears to be an online gallery, so this appears to be a primary source, using information provided by BerriBlue. David notMD (talk) 19:27, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @David notMD I agree about the Singluart.com citation, that is used 8 times. I was debating about removing that citation entirely, because I noticed that it is a user-submitted art sales website, and definitely not a reliable source. It is non-encyclopedic. Netherzone (talk) 23:14, 7 February 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.