Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry P. Glass


 * 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. WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) Goodvac (talk) 07:45, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Henry P. Glass

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't meet notability guidelines. Primary sources and a few patents are among the only signs of "notability". Mythpage88 (talk) 02:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment — This looks like a secondary source, an article discussing his works in Design Issues. Jean (t&middot;c) 02:43, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * A publication of dubious notability. Mythpage88 (talk) 02:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Design Issues (published by MIT Press) is of dubious notability!? It's an editorially-reviewed academic specialty publication. The tagger of Design Issues also tagged Annals of Anatomy as of dubious notability, an astonishing assertion.   Acroterion   (talk)   14:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep — Google books shows several results, including this and this. Jean (t&middot;c) 03:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sources found suggest clear notability.--Michig (talk) 07:25, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is not temporary. The visual arts and industrial design are very poorly represented in Wikipeda, and designers from the pre-Internet era face significant handicaps in documenting notability, leading to an unfortunate level of systemic bias in favor of recentism. While performing artists get huge quantities of press, visual arts and design get little, resulting in under-representation of such topics on Wikipedia and requiring a good bit of research in relatively obscure publications (at least as far as the general public is concerned). This is a noted industrial designer and design professor who did significant work in furniture design when there was a lot of experimentation with new materials. While this is a blog, it has good pictures  of Glass's Swingline furniture, a significant and influential design.  Cricket chair here . Documented in secondary sources, professor, author, designer. Exhibited at the Art Institute of Chicago  . Blog link from Interior Design magazine: . While we could wish for better sources, this is a discussion concerning notability, not sourcing.  The best sources for Glass will be found in dead-tree publications.   Acroterion   (talk)   14:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per all, the "Modernism" magazine PDF which triggers a SPAM filter for some reason is a good source. The link from the article to here is red for some reason, but this seems a WP:SNOW. Johnbod (talk) 15:43, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: Notable as above. SL93 (talk) 23:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article needs some work, but I have no doubt that Johnbod will bring this up to FA status pronto. I think he hasn't had one since June. Drmies (talk) 01:21, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Even as nominated, the article clearly had sources that falsified the nominator's "primary sources" claim, e.g. the Chicago Tribune obituary. That and the IDSA fellowship are enough to convince me of notability, let alone the other stuff brought to light by this AfD. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. A rather puzzling nomination. The Design Issues article is substantial and was already in the article at the time it was nominated. --Hegvald (talk) 05:36, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe that the nominator misunderstands the notability guidelines, interpreting an old tagging of Design Issues as a possibly non-notable publication as an indication that Design Issues is not a suitable source. See their comment above.  Acroterion   (talk)   06:07, 17 December 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.