Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Rosenberg


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  Onel 5969  TT me 13:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

David Rosenberg

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Despite wading through the long list of references, I can't find anything that conveys notability. Passing mentions, tangential references but nothing that says this person is notable. Most merely name check him as " commissaire". This article has been PRODed twice for similar concerns. The sheer bulk of references and the super-abundance of wiki-links and name-checking doesn't make up for the lack of real substance. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk 11:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Delete Except passing mentions on exhibitions he curated, a couple of infotainment books he compiled with others and one short interview with Le Parisien, I've found nothing. No substantial coverage, only a collection of all the google hits with his name. Oh, and hundreds of people receive the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres annually. AddMore der Zweite (talk) 22:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * keep I just reviewed the references, and only kept the relevant ones, pages which mention David Rosenberg's implication in the project. He is an author and art curator so there will be no post on TMZ about him to show his "star status", but he is mentioned by every institution he worked with. Please note that he was rewarded by the French Minister of Culture and Communications (Ordre des Arts et des Lettres) and is listed by  Bibliothèque Nationale de France (cf. references). Also, please check the notability of Palais de Tokyo, Maison Rouge etc, you will see that to work for these, you must be "notable". For your information, in French, art curator is "commissaire d'exposition", that's why he is mentioned as commissaire in every reference site. Besides, for almost all his publications the ISBN is mentioned, I can't see what kind of reference could be linked to that to prove his notability.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anh.tamy (talk • contribs) 12:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)  has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and AFD. — Jkudlick t c s 09:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Just so you know, rewards Ordre des Arts et des Lettres are delivered by the French Ministry of Culture, it is indeed granted to about 200 contributors of arts and literature each year. The French population in 2014 was about 66 million people, which means that only 0,000303% got the reward. So sorry if I do think that the reward proves the notability of the person.
 * You're also talking about "a couple of infotainment books he compiled": I can count 30 in the list (not including collective works). I'm not sure if you're an art expert, but I can assure you those books are not even close to "infotainment", they are art books about notable artists.
 * And besides in Le Parisien, he was also interviewed by Le Figaro which dedicated the front page and 4 pages inside of its Culture magazine (from an october 2015 issue). I couldn't find it online, if you could help me find it, would be useful.
 * And there is also an interview on BFM (BFM is a kind of a French CNN). The interview is about an exhibition he curated as part of the FIAC program. You can google "FIAC", it's one of world's most important art fair dedicated to contemporary art.
 * To sum up, in my opinion the notability of one's works prove one's notability. Anh.tamy (talk) 23:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Strong Delete - as it fails WP:Notability.--DaeafcMnnC (talk) 09:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 23:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * (provisional) KEEP: I looked over this article and spent most of my time scratching my head at all the names of people (I didn't count, but it was in the hundreds upon hundreds). The article is confusing. Assuming all the references are legit (I don't speak French and wouldn't know a reliable French source from a hole in the ground), if the author can trim the fat and organize it better, I'd say keep. If the author (or someone else) doesn't fix it by the end of this AfD, then my vote is Delete. It's me...Sallicio!$\color{Red} \oplus$ 23:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - this person's notability is not to be questioned. Indeed, the article contains a lot of names, but some contribute to the person's notability- I'm no art expert but I guess Picasso or Jeff Koons are famous artists. The article needs to be improved by wikifying its presentation, I do agree that the neverending lists of names are confusing, but that's not the subject of the AfD.Waka waka1509 (talk) 11:15, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. Note that Chevalier of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres is approximately equivalent to a British MBE, which is not considered to qualify a recipient for inherent notability under WP:ANYBIO. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you give a cite or precedent for that? I couldn't find it in the ANYBIO link. It seems that some orders in the French system (those relating to civil service) are probably not notable as significant awards for ANYBIO or WP:PROF, but that the order of arts and letters is more significant. It seems significant enough for me to lean towards keep, but I'd like to know about precedent. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, the Order of Art and Letters is notable enough itself to have its own article on Wikipedia. So would it be logical to consider that people rewarded by a notable award are not notable ? Waka waka1509 (talk) 22:15, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No, sorry that isn't logical. I have an Academic degree but I am not notable (thankfully). The award is notable but the recipient isn't notable because of the award. This is a case of "notability is not inherited".  Velella  Velella Talk 22:38, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * An academic degree is not an award.Waka waka1509 (talk) 10:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That's funny. I was certainly awarded my degrees! Or that's what the universities called it anyway. Maybe you'd like to tell them they're wrong? But, to expand. The Purple Heart certainly is an award by any standards. We have an article on it. So, by your logic every American serviceman who's been wounded should have an article, should they? -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:42, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Lol why not, if it responds to WP:MILNG. This is a debate, I'm only giving my opinion on the Order of Arts and Letters and as a French citizen, I'd like to underline that in common opinion in France that award is maybe not as notable as a Nobel prize, but it's still a prize discerned by the French Ministry as a recognition of what it considers as "remarkable". Go argue with the Ministry and tell them their award is worth peanuts... As far, the only argument I can see here is that you consider the number of awarded too high (200) to have any value. Not to mention that it's a subjective argument. Besides, shouldn't we discuss more about the person's work to debate on his notability ? I don't think that the article mentions ONLY the award, aren't the exhibits and books he wrote a more interesting material for debate ? Waka waka1509 (talk) 13:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * And as I said, I'm not passing judgement on Rosenberg's notability but only on the statement that his award confers inherent notability. Neither did I say the award was worth peanuts. As an Englishman, I certainly don't think the MBE or OBE (or the DSO or the MC or the DFC or a host of other British awards and decorations) are worth peanuts, but neither do I consider that they confer inherent notability on recipients, and this has in fact been established over many AfDs. Given this award is no higher or rarer than those I don't think we can consider it confers notability when they don't; that would be systemic bias in favour of French awards. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:43, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Cite a precedent for what? The award being equivalent to an MBE? That's obvious from its precedence and the numbers awarded (up to 200 every year). That the MBE doesn't make a recipient inherently notable? Numerous AfDs. A CBE is the lowest honour we consider confers inherent notability. Note that I'm not expressing an opinion on this individual's notability; I'm merely saying that this award alone doesn't make him inherently notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:51, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep It is clear over and over again (to me) that most Wikipedian's have zero understanding of the workings of the art world. --MurderByDeletionism"bang!" 04:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps Keep simply because the article looks keepably currently., as you ask to be notified of these subjects, perhaps you can give some insight. SwisterTwister   talk  06:14, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Unlike most such articles, this one is fixable .Contrary to what was said above, the lists of artists in each exhibit he curated do not add to notability --they rather give the  imprsssion of being a cv, not an encycopedia article. A proper search should be able to find review of his exhibitions: if not, we can look at it again.  DGG ( talk ) 07:21, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment From the discussions above, I have a feeling that what bothers here is the page layout. I do agree that those huge blocks of names are hurtful to the eyes, but as said, it can be fixed. Maybe for each exhibit, we should cite the 5 most significative artists and just indicate the number of the overall ? Some users are just here to throw a stone, but I would like to remind you all (me included) that Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia, so do some research and participate in the improvement of the articles instead of dismissing one's work.Waka waka1509 (talk) 10:36, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I removed the artists. What needs doing next is checking the list of exhibitions. It's specified in the article as a selective list, so it can probably be selected a little more rigorously, but this would be better done by someone with better knowledge than Ihave.  DGG ( talk ) 16:46, 4 December 2015 (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.