Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dunne & Raby


 * 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 and cleanup. Krakatoa Katie  02:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Dunne &amp; Raby

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Probably not notable. Redbull47 (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep If they have work in the permanent collections of MOMA and the V&A - two of the most prominent design museums in the world, I'd say they're notable. I've already declined a speedy deletion (A7) on this article once.    Acroterion  (talk)  20:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This for a start. I'll source the article as time permits.    Acroterion  (talk)  20:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

*Delete per nom. No reliable sources to substantiate any claims of notability. The various museums listed in the article are just listed as "Partners" on their (atrociously designed, if I may say so) website - as a minimum, we'll need proof that their work is indeed in the permanent collections, and I'm not sure that will be enough, in and of itself, to ensure notability. Tevildo (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  20:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep They've shown at MoMA, V&A, Pompidou Centre, have at least one reference available The Independent), 35000 ghits, plus several published books. They're notable.  freshacconci  speak to me  22:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Although the original article as submitted to AfD required some cleaning up to clarify claims (they were not the sole authors of the MoMA piece, the Pompidou show was a group exhibition), the references now supplied should be sufficient to justify notability.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Citations are getting better, but there's still some way to go.  The MOMA piece is credited to Michael Anastassiades, and the Independent article describes them as "The contenders with the lowest profile" for an award that isn't sufficiently notable to have own article; they were only on the short-list for it, in any case.  Tevildo (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2008 (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.