Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dana Gordon (2nd nomination)


 * 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 is clear. However if someone thinks that sourced information should be discussed elsewhere, I'm happy to provide the text for merger/attribution. Star  Mississippi  22:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Dana Gordon
AfDs for this article:


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

This painting has absolutely no notability for a stand-alone article at WP. The sources only cite references that back generalized comments about the artist; not the actual painting. Any analytical content about the painting is purely "personal opinion" or "original research". The section Formal qualities have no references to back any claims. The section Purpose is pure speculation; and references cited do not back any claims for notable inclusion but mere mention of the artist, not the subject. The section Background is once again merely a personal opinionated take on the painting with absolutely no sources to back claims, again. This painting is of no significance and if there is anything to be mentioned about it, the content could easily merge with the artist's page. However, without sources to back any of the claims in this article, I can't see it being mentioned for any plausible reason. Maineartists (talk) 01:34, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete An engine search rendered no relevant or notable sources that review, discuss, analyze or even mention the painting other than what has been created in this article at WP and Wiki-linked. No historical significance or background for inclusion can be found in any source that would constitute inclusion. Maineartists (talk) 01:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete In the previous AfD for this article, I objected to deletion, and so did one other contributor. The article was kept. That didn't mean that I thought the article is any good: It's terrible. None of the online sources cited in the article mention the painting. The article if full of outright nonsense: "By 1972, Neel was nearing the end of her life..." Not true, she died 12 years later, in 1984. "Dana Gordon depicts an everyday man, presumably of middle or lower class. " Dana Gordon is a painter and writer, born in 1944. The article claims that the work is owned by the Neel Estate, but that failed verification: The entire article is WP:OR, and none of it appears to be supported by RS. One day, it may be possible to write a properly sourced article, but the current version must be entirely rewritten or deleted. Vexations (talk) 11:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep As I said before - Strong painting by Alice Neel who had a major retrospective at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. A portrait of an important writer and artist who has been a prolific essayist and art critic in recent years...Modernist (talk) 11:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Read this by art critic James Panero: ...Modernist (talk) 11:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Modernist I think Alice Neel is one of the best and most important American modern painters, and I'd love it if we had articles on many of her paintings, but: Is there anything in this article that you think can be kept? Vexations (talk) 11:47, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Modernist That didn't hold water then, and it won't hold water now. Personal opinion does not warrant an article. I did read the article 3 times before nominating it for AfD. The article is about Dana Gordon the artist, and doesn't even mention the painting. As well: online sources regarding the "retrospective at the Metropolitan Museum of Art" do not mention this painting. There is no significant or relevant sources that back your claim of its importance. Maineartists (talk) 12:00, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, the painting wasn't in the MET retrospective. Do we know where it is? I've searched auction records, but can't find it. Vexations (talk) 12:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * We do not. The article only speculates: "... the painting was most likely commissioned by the man for his own personal ownership, before being handed over to the Alice Neel Estate." The inline citations do not even back this claim. Maineartists (talk) 12:12, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Frankly, Dana Gordon is notable as an artist and writer. The article should reflect that and engage his complex biography...needs some competent editorial work. See this link......Modernist (talk) 13:09, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think both Alice Neel and James Panero are telling us that Dana Gordon is notable. The article definitely needs improvement though...Modernist (talk) 13:13, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1. The article is not about Dana Gordon. 2. "I think" is not a reason for inclusion. Supply references to back your claim. 3. The article needs references. End of story. Maineartists (talk) Maineartists (talk) 13:31, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * What on earth does this link have to do with the painting by Alice Neel? The segment on CBS Sunday Morning - "Artist Alice Neel, a collector of souls" last year never mentioned this painting; yet talked about her vast production of portraits. I'm not sure you understand how articles at WP actually work. Dana Gordon is not notable as an artist or writer. Otherwise, he would have his own article at WP. But that is completely beside the point. There is not one source that makes this painting (or its artist) notable. The link you provided is the artist's own website. The reference itself is mere promotional and not even a source for this painting or its article. Maineartists (talk) 02:18, 1 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. The painting itself lacks significant coverage in independent sources. The critical commentary on the painting is all original research. Clearly fails WP:OR and WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 20:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - I understand Modernist's frustration since Alice Neel is an exceptionally important artist, and Dana Gordon an interesting artist and writer. However, if I'm not mistaken, the article is not about Gordon, it's about a portrait of Gordon, and the painting itself is not notable. It does seem like WP:OR, and that there significant coverage of the painting does not exist (at least not yet). If sources on the painting can be found, I'm happy to change my !vote, or if enough sources on Gordon himself can be found to create a stand alone article on him, then the painting can be included in that article. At this time it does not meet WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 20:03, 2 July 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.