Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catalyst Arts


 * 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. There is no consensus for deletion. The article has improved since nomination, and there are sources in the article and available though not yet in the article to assert notability. Defaulting to keep.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  01:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Catalyst Arts

 * – ( View AfD View log )

While the organisation is doubtless laudable the article has been uncited since creation and flagged as such for almost a year. The article is a promotional essay and a link farm to the directors. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Whilst a hunt through the Google news archive reveals LOTSOFSOURCES, I can't find anything that's not either listings info, a quote from someone associated with the project, or a passing mention. No in-depth coverage, so fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 10:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment sufficient mentions in reliable sources that are incorporated into the article as citations would save the article, I think. It is the reliability of the sources that contain the mentions that at least asserts verifiability. Notability is, of course, the other side of the pancake. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment for just now. A long-standing organisation well known in its field, but I recognise the article sorely lacks refs. Google Books turns up various more solid refs though frustratingly mainly in snippet view. Catalyst is mentioned among "influential groups" (Grant Kester, “Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art"), as a notable surviver (Flash Art in 2001), as "exciting" ((World Literature today, 2007), and among "Notable independent, artist-run spaces" (Manifesta 2: European Biennial for Contemporary Art, Luxembourg). It has a paragraph in Belfast in Your Pocket and is discussed in Variant magazine. AllyD (talk) 22:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment including the things that you find in the article to assert and verify its notability (assuming what you have found can do that) would be a beneficial outcome, please. My view is that the article as it stands at present is inappropriate here, hence the nomination. A good outcome of this process would be the saving of the article by relevant work. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 01:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ...I see you have made a start :) There is much to do though, yet. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 01:12, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I tend not to use snippet views for refs as you don't see enough context; so the above is more a plea for anyone who does have access to these books to check them and add if appropriate. As you saw, I've added a few refs but they fall short of what's needed. AllyD (talk) 08:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Their inclusion in http://www.dublincontemporary.com/exhibition/artist/catalyst_multiple, is notable although the wiki on the event itself could use more work Euartcurator (talk) 18:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 21:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B  music  ian  16:46, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment The article itself has been much improved. However I am still struggling to find true notability and thus to verify that from reliable sources. A reference to a 1997 piece speaks of a 'three artist' place, which, unless they are Damien Hirst, Tracey Emin, and David Hockney, does not help its cause. though it has, surely, to have increased in size since then. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:34, 14 February 2012 (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.