Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher DeRubeis


 * 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. Killiondude (talk) 02:43, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Christopher DeRubeis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails the notability criteria for artists, WP:ARTIST. The sources provided are his own website, a press release, websites of galleries that represent his work and a single piece of local Santa Clarita news. I'm not quite sure what's going on with the MUSE Awards. If the nominations are for the MUSE awards that I'm thinking of (http://museaward.com/) then there are a few problems: they have no “Mixed Media” and “New Movement” categories, and getting nominated means nothing, because anyone can enter the competition. Per WP:BEFORE I can't find a reliable source that says he won any award. The claim that DeRubeis is the "Father of the Conceptual Movement" is patently absurd. That would mean that other conceptual artists acknowledge that deRubeis had a seminal influence on the development of conceptual art. That is not the case, and no reliable sources exist that back up that claim. We don't take a gallery's (or more accurately, a picture framer's) word for such a statement. The article is promotional and should be deleted. Mduvekot (talk) 22:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * In no way was this article intended as a "puff piece," or as being promotional in nature, simply informative. While DeRubeis may not fulfill all the notability criteria perfectly, that certainly does not mean that he fails them. On the contrary, there is more that he meets than what he doesn't, which continues to increase. And galleries are not actually "representing" his work by exhibiting it, simply providing a venue. Rather, they serve to provide a reliable third party source of information about the nature of a work and its impact. - JGabbard (talk) 23:24, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you please let us know which of the 4 notability criteria you think DeRubeis meets and why? My assessment is that he is not regarded as an important figure, is not known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique, has not has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work and that his work has not become a significant monument, has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, has not won significant critical attention and is not is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Mduvekot (talk) 16:56, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Certainly -- How can you say that DeRubeis has not originated a new technique when he has crafted his own trademarked style of art ("abstract sensualism")? He is world renowned for his innovative work, so therefore he fulfills notability standard #2.  His accomplishments more than justify what little is written here. These standards, while they are very high, are also rather arbitrary, placing younger artists at a disadvantage. Also, standards #1 and #4 may not have universal applicability, because DeRubeis' primary appeal is to first-time art collectors. However, by being heralded as the "Master of Metal Art" (i.e., metal painting), there is some basis for asserting that he has fulfilled these as well.  So he has not only found his niche in the art world but has been shown to have actually expanded its base, and the trajectory of his increasing international acclaim is certainly consistent with the general tenor of all of these notability criteria. - JGabbard (talk) 19:20, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * "Trademarked style" is just baloney, as painting styles are not trademarkable. We do not go for hyped language like this here. Removed from article lede.104.163.153.162 (talk) 00:16, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * We don't care what deRubeis or people who sell his work say about him. We only care what other people say about him or his work. If you claim that he meets criteria 1, can you name the independent, reliable source that says he is an important figure? Same for all the other criteria, please Mduvekot (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, this documentary by The Global Touch Group: Behind The Artist: Chris Derubeis. Abstract Sensualism
 * The Global Touch Group is a branding and content development agency. As a source they are unusable, because they are neither independent nor reliable. Please familiarize yourself with our guideline on identifying reliable sources. Mduvekot (talk) 21:59, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete does not meet the notability criteria for artists.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 00:47, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per the abovementioned lack of reliable independent sources. While the standards of notability may seem "arbitrary", due to the disadvantage that younger artists face, they are, however the standards which exist, and this isn't the place to discuss whether they need an overhaul. Further, younger artists are entirely less likely to be notable even if the only notability standard applied is GNG, so there's nothing dramatic there. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 02:08, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete The vast majority of the sources (all except one, as far as I can see) were directly or indirectly produced by the article subject. Does not meet either GNG or ARTIST guidelines.104.163.153.162 (talk) 23:44, 8 January 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.