Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gita Hashemi


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 04:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Gita Hashemi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I do not see clear evidence of notability ; no major award, no evidence of work in museums, no critical studies of the wwork.  DGG ( talk ) 21:44, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep I have added sources to the article. She is a performance artist and as such museums don't always collect their work. However, there are plenty of reviews of her work in RS and I found some biographical information. Passes CREATIVE with reviews. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Oops, I should add that these are critical studies of her work:, in case people don't have full access. The other reviews aren't as in-depth, though the Hemispheric Institute reviews several of her works throughout the article. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:50, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep after Megalibrarygirl's improvements. On the one hand, notability by our standards is met, just. Lots of people have written on her work and she has had good shows. I do believe that articles representing an established person from a diversity group like this that should be bent towards keep rather than delete in cases where the !vote is close. It is better to include diversity than to exclude it. I know it's not policy to say that, but the rest of the Western world recognizes the importance of diversity: for example, Harvard values diversity, Apple values inclusion and diversity, the US government does, The European Union does, but WP:CREATIVE does not. Basically every large company or government in the Western world recognizes the value of inclusion and diversity. It's something to consider. 104.163.140.141 (talk) 02:22, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Inclusivity and diversity are imperative when it comes to recruiting and retaining new Wikipedia editors, but are not valid rationales for deciding notability of article subjects. Certainly, we need to account for and counter systemic biases, but we still need sources to write an article. I think that we can have articles on artists who do not meet any of the criteria in WP:ARTIST, but then the subject does need to fulfill the requirements of the WP:GNG which I interpret as: "Do we have sources that are sufficiently in-depth, reliable and independent to base an article on, so that everything we say about the subject can be verified?" Even then, if an artists meets the GNG they almost certainly meet 4(c): has won significant critical attention. I think that's the case here. Keep. Vexations (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2018 (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.