Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elle Mehrmand


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 05:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Elle Mehrmand

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article was Prodded, then undeleted via WP:REFUND. A lack of reliable sources keeps this article from demonstrating the notability of its subject, a graduate art student. The article seems to be sourced, but many of these sources are links to either press releases promoting an event or direct links to art galleries promoting the subject of the article rather than NPOV reliable sources that confirm the notability of the subject. The article does list under a review section articles in which the subject is mentioned. However they are mostly short comments about an upcoming event rather than a review of an upcoming work, and do not go beyond run of the mill coverage of amy local event. This coverage fails to establish notability per WP:GNG XinJeisan (talk) 06:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

A simple google news search turns up 5 articles on the subject. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=elle+mehrmand&sa=N&tbs=nws:1,ar:1

While Mehrmand may be a graduate student artist, she is currently exhibiting internationally in major art exhibitions. These are not "local coverage" shows, but internationally recognized events, like the California Biennial. I am a STRONG KEEP on this article. To delete her would only demonstrate a lack of understanding about contemporary art or a lack of interest in female artists. How could the Wired Magazine article on her be "local coverage"? http://www.wired.com/underwire/2010/11/california-biennial/?pid=1906&viewall=true

And the Art21 article reviews her work extensively. Art 21 is about as reputable an art source as you can get. Aside from her mention in the recent issue of Artforum, with a collective she is in, the bang lab, here: http://artforum.com/museums/page_id=2&item_id=6295  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.239.61.44 (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  —XinJeisan (talk) 04:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Just clicking the Google Scholar link here turns up a new publication in 2011 that Mehrmand is a co-author for: "Productive confusions: learning from simulations of pandemic virus outbreaks in Second Life (Proceedings Paper)" http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Elle+Mehrmand%22  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.20.125 (talk) 08:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Added a photo and more links to recent performances at UCLA and UAG, to respond to initial request for more "reliable sources", as well as an extended review of the UCLA performance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.20.125 (talk) 15:42, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment A reliable source has to come from a independent third party. Since that article was published by the Center for the Study of Women at UCLA, which the article itself states was the cosponsor  of the event, it doesn't establish the notability of the event nor the artists involved -- in fact it isn't even a review but more a summary of the event. WP:IRS is a good place to start to learn more about what constitutes a reliable source on wikipedia.  Also can you remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes and the end of any post. XinJeisan (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Seems like this point may be getting confused. Since the Center for Study of Women at a major university co-sponsored and wrote about the performance, that fact would seem to establish its notability. If UCLA were the university that Merhman attended, I'd agree that her performing there wouldn't establish notability. But that's not the case. As an outside university saw fit to showcase the performance's to Women's Studie, it would seem to me to be notable. 68.7.242.144 (talk) 08:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Mehrmand's CV at http://bang.calit2.net/elle/?page_id=120 lists a number of public exhibitions in Los Angeles, San Diego, and Tijuana, but also farther afield in Canada, Colombia, etc. Her work has been exhibited at major galleries like LACE in LA, and notably at ISEA, the largest international exhibition of electronic art. 128.54.43.222 (talk) 00:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

They shouldn't delete Elle Mehrmand's page. Micha Cárdenas and Elle Mehrmand : Mixed Relations (1) on the Pharmakon Library would be a perfect addition to their research 'hallway': http://pharmakonlibrary.blogspot.com/
 * These images portray the technology used in the series mixed relations, a collaboration between Micha Cárdenas and Elle Mehrmand. mixed relations consists of a series of performances and workshops that explore the relations between bodies and technology within mixed realities. The performances focus on using the body as an instrument to produce live audio, linking the physical and virtual worlds. The goal is to look at bodies in relation to each other, as well as in relation to the technologies which extend and multiply them, sonically, visually and physically. The performances explore themes of affective tension andanticipation, techno-fetishism, and D.I.Y. cyborg bodies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holly Eskew (talk • contribs) 19:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC) Hols (talk) 08:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Holly Eskew is the same name as an artist who has performed with the subject of this article: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=holly+eskew+Elle+Mehrmand
 * Just because they performed in the same event does not mean they performed together, which they did not. Again, a demonstrated lack of understanding about contemporary art. Also, Eskew's sources are still valid regardless of her being in the same event. You're using an Ad Hominem argument against her point. The Pharmakon Library is a respected art project supported by an established gallery, the Silverman Gallery in San Francisco. 128.54.33.44 (talk) 22:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes but it could be that because of their relationship that Holly Eskew has a conflict of interest Wikipeida policy requires editors who might have a conflict of interest to declare such an interest.  If Holly Eskew the artist is the same person as Holly Eskew, it should be taken into consideration when reaching consensus on whether this article should be deleted or not.  XinJeisan (talk) 01:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * "'Comment'" What conflict of interest? Anyone can point to a reliable source that supports *the best kind of evidence* for a local respected art project --Mehrmand's credits on the Pharmakon Library have nothing to do with me, Holly Eskew the artist, the same person as Holly Eskew. The full body of an artist's work should be taken into consideration when reaching consensus on whether Elle Merhman's page section should be deleted or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holly Eskew (talk • contribs) 08:48, 12 March 2011 (UTC) Hols (talk) 08:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - I agree the standards we should use are WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO or WP:CREATIVE, as the subject is a performace artist. She would fail WP:PROF badly, as a graduate student.  I am not sure if she passes any of the guidelines or rules, from a quick view of the sources already in the article.  Several citations are to blogs; she was reviewed by Art21, but it's not clear that she appeared on that notable PBS show.  Also, the sources only point to touring in California and Nevada, not internationally, and the some of those sources are blogs, which normally are not considered reliable.  I'll place a rescue tag on it, just in case -- we want to have more articles of interest to women.  Onto WP:BEFORE, I will try to find additional sources, but I am not ready to state whether this should be kept or deleted. Bearian (talk) 15:11, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - I searched online for addtional sources, saw some more, and added one from Google Books. I also copyedited it a bit.  I think she is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia.  I am still working on another article, and can not do all of the heavy lifting of rescuing every worthy article out there. Bearian (talk) 15:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The subject is part of the collective who created the Transborder Immigrant Tool, which definitely meets WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE. She appears with the group in this news story about the project: http://www.sdcitybeat.com/sandiego/article-8159-after-the-storm.html I found a number of citations about the project, which the subject worked on, and added them to the "Reviews" section of the page. 68.107.20.125 (talk) 00:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * additionally, Mehrmand's credits on Version is a reviewed journal, submissions have to go to Jordan Crandall and Caleb for review. NOTE: ATTRACTIONS.JORDAN+CRANDALL.HOTEL.042109 and latter *HOTEL* (the film) won all kinds of awards, and validates the sites worthiness. See: AROUSALS.ELLE+MEHRMAND.MICHA+CÁRDENAS .EROTIC+ELECTROSYMBIOTIC+ENCOUNTERS .032310 . This documents an autobiographical narrative which is an important element in some feminist work. See the French Feminist  Hélène Cixous and her view on "Writing the Body" ~ pointing to women who draw on personal archives and autobiographical narratives in a collective memory and to those political transformation in later years. ref: Performing Feminisms: Feminist Critical Theory and Theatre by author Sue-Ellen Case Hols (talk) 18:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

here is another reliable source for mehrmand's work, HASTAC is part of the macarthur foundation and this article describes an event at Duke University, not local to UCSD at all, supported by a broad range of departments: http://www.hastac.org/events/visiting-artists-micha-c%C3%A1rdenas-and-elle-mehrmand-duke also, the article mentioned above from Linzi Juliano is an academic source, so it seems to fulfill the NPOV requirements, even though the publishing organization was one of the co-sponsors. It is not a summary, it is a review including praise and criticism such as this: "This sexualized pain, as well as elle’s shifting between conductor and echo arguably provided a more stimulating visual than the screen image with its barren landscape and generally respectful inhabitants". (p. 25) Omgchead (talk) 23:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —XinJeisan (talk) 22:42, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  —XinJeisan (talk) 22:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep The article list notable museums that have shown this person's work, thus proving they are notable. It also list major newspapers that have given them coverage.    D r e a m Focus  21:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - A review of the sources listed in the article, and those found at google news, has convinced me that this article passes WP:GNG. Onthegogo (talk) 00:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep, even though history will show that the amount of attention devoted to "performance artists" like this was the intelligentsia's equivalent of pet rocks and mood rings. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No relevant, significant coverage exists for this person except for some sources talking about Transborder Immigrant Tool, but this isn't the article on Transborder Immigrant Tool, and everything that needs to be said about that subject is already at Locative media. Note that there's a number of related articles (Electronic_Disturbance_Theater, Electronic Disturbance Theatre, Micha_Cárdenas, Ricardo Dominguez (professor)) all equally as badly sourced as this one.--Sloane (talk) 00:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * There are tons of relevant, significant sources cited in this article, including original writing in journals, reviews which discuss the artist's work, book chapters and educational sources. Which one do you have a problem with? The artist in question is involved in the Transborder Immigrant Tool as well as a number of their own projects, which have been presented in museums and galleries in numerous different countries. Your claim is very vague, which leads me to think that there must be some other bias you're speaking from. Or can you specify which source you think should be removed? 68.101.205.18 (talk) 04:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Subject appears to fail WP:GNG, as most findings on google, do not appear to meet WP:RS criteria, or are do not provide "significant coverage" and/or may not be considered as "Independent of the subject", therefore does not contribute to the individual being notable. Notability maybe found for the tool that the subject may have assisted in creating that received significant news coverage, however, that does make the subject them self being notable, but the tool/app; and itself may only warrant mention in the broader context of the issue that it relates to (illegal immigration in the united states, united states mexico border, and other such articles). Per WP:BASIC, the depth of coverage given to the individual is not "substantial". --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 10:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Right Cow? This person is certainly neutral "This user is or was a member of The United States Army. This user is or was a United States Army ROTC Cadet. GOP This user supports the U.S. Republican Party." But this user also doesn't list specific articles that are problematic. There are such a wide variety of sources that establish WP:GNG including an Art21 article (a hugely respected art publication) that directly discusses Mehrmand's work, apart from the Transborder Immigrant Tool, and a scholarly publication that discusses her performance at UCLA and originally authored journal articles by the subject that are not part of the Transborder Tool. I don't see why a contemporary artist should be considered by WP to be less notable because they are involved in a large number of collaborations with other artists. It makes them more notable, actually. 128.54.40.19 (talk) 00:18, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - The article and discussion cite a number of sources that establish notability and WP:GNG from a number of angles. Arguments for deletion seem to focus on individual sources which in themselves don't establish notability. But the existence of unconvincing sources should not detract from the fact that other sources are cited that do establish notability. 68.7.242.144 (talk) 04:40, 30 March 2011 (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.