Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Functional Surrealism


 * 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. Secret account 02:12, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Functional Surrealism

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This was deprodded without explanation. The term is a non-notable neologism (coined in 2010 apparently) with no independent sources. The article reads like an essay and is basically original research. What sources that have been added have no connection to the topic (most reference surrealism) and essentially serve to point out that this article is original research and there is no use of the term outside the context of the artist who coined it. Fails WP:GNG.  freshacconci  talk to me  00:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  freshacconci  talk to me  00:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

154}}
 * Delete per nom. Johnbod (talk) 01:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is a consumer of its references rather than being supported by them: reton, Kaprow and Rosemont all precede the positing of this proposed movement by one or two generations. No evidence that it is notable in itself. AllyD (talk) 06:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * KeepThe article is about an art movement originated in 2010 and a manifest that the artist, Philip Henderickx and Marie Daelemans published in 2010, the manifest and the art movement refers to sources and terms used in those articles and so have a connection to this article. The sources that have been added have connection to the article as the manifesto reference to terms of surrealism / Fluxus / Happening / other noted articles. The article is not original research, it is an growing art movement in central Europe, several art manifestations happened under this term and so is larger than only the context of the artists mentioned in it. 81.82.215.154 (talk) 12:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC) — 81.82.215.154 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep I understand the concern of freshacconci, have added more references to the article on Functional Surrealism, this article is a reference to an existing art movement and is not an original research. Thosewhogetit (talk) 13:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC) — Thosewhogetit (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * There is only one reference that appears to be about the concept. All other references are either about other topics or are closely associated with the artists. References need to be independent of the subject and need to indicate that there is usage of the term beyond the artists who created it. So far, there is no evidence of that. New art movements rarely gain enough traction to be able to be the topic of a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not meant to help establish a concept. It needs to be already established.  freshacconci  talk to me  13:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I will contact the artists to find more online references, however the mentioned articles in Bibliography are published articles on the matter, will update asap.Thosewhogetit (talk) 14:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above discussion establishing that this is a neologism that is not notable. Candleabracadabra (talk) 04:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Many published literature and articles mention functional surrealism, this is not a neologism. 178.50.85.193 (talk) 08:59, 21 August 2013 (UTC) — 178.50.85.193 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * 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.