Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henriette Huldisch


 * 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. Michig (talk) 07:54, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Henriette Huldisch

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability. Draft moved directly to mainspace without review by its author. Several refs simply note her appointment. Nothing else hints at notability. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk 04:48, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree. I am in no way affiliated with the subject, just an art historian. Significant curatorial work makes this subject worthy of an article, in my opinion. Please see references that include NYTimes, artforum, and The Observer. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:55, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. KCVelaga (talk) 05:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment This article was nominated for deletion SIX MINUTES after it was moved to mainspace. What happened to WP:BEFORE C2 "If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article", and C3 "If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, or an associated WikiProject, and/or adding a cleanup tag"? RebeccaGreen (talk) 07:45, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, the speed of the nomination is a bit obscene. Velella, have you never heard of WP:BITE?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 09:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)


 * This article appeared almost completely formed as a Draft 14 minutes before the nominations. The appearance of completely formed drafts is sometimes a cause for concern so I was doing my searches and finding nothing of significant notability only to find it booted straight from Draft to Mainspace with no review. I felt strongly that this was COI editing and possibly paid editing, and the weakness of the refs strongly suggested that this should be considered as to its appropriateness on Wikipedia. This was produced by an editor who has authored 13 articles, many about people at Whitney Museum of Art and most avoiding review. This is hardly the hallmark of a newbie.  Velella  Velella Talk 09:51, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * oh how some editors forget when they were pups or kits the article creator's 1st edit ocurred on 18 Dec 2018 so has now been on WP for less than 7 weeks which in my books is a newbie (allbeit, one who creates well formed articles:)). Coolabahapple (talk) 15:43, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:47, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep a couple of the sources in the article are OK, and I see many mentions that are more than passing in a search.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 09:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Thank you for the help ThatMontrealIP. I added a source and info from a NYMag article that goes more in depth about Huldisch.--Wil540 art (talk) 16:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep This shows a number of books the person in question has authored, I don't know at first glance how significant they are, but it might be worth more investigation to see if they would help qualify for WP:NACADEMIC, which will take some time. As far as having a well-formed article, isn't that the whole purpose of the Sandbox? Using it is a positive. I personally have never built an article and had it reviewed prior to putting it in the mainspace. LovelyLillith (talk) 17:53, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I have found and added more reviews of exhibitions she has curated, and catalogue essays she has written. There is certainly non-trivial coverage and reviews in multiple, independent, reliable sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:22, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you RebeccaGreen, nice edit. Would you mind looking at this another article I wrote on a curator that is also flagged? Articles_for_deletion/Christopher_Y._Lew. Please go ahead and edit/give your two cents if you so desire. thanks again --Wil540 art (talk) 07:49, 8 February 2019 (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.