Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hosfelt gallery


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Hosfelt gallery

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Business listing for an art gallery, with not the slightest evidence for, or even suggestion of, wider impact. Has a long list of artists it represents, almost all of which are either redlinks or dab entries which don't include artists. Calton | Talk 02:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  10:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment/Weak Keep while the news results are mainly listings of who is exhibiting there, there's some evidence that the gallery is notable. I'll see what I can do to clean it up-current condition is a mess. StarM 16:14, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  -- StarM 16:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Additional Comment I cleaned it up some-the architect won an award for the bulding-and there are a lot of mentions, but I don't know what makes a gallery notable. There's more than enough out there if someone wants to work on this. StarM 16:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  -- StarM 16:54, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * STRONG KEEP - This is a relevant article providing valuable added information to Wikipedia. Please stop the overzealous policing and deletion of Wikipedia articles. Furthermore, this meets each of Wikipedia's Five Pillars which explicitly states they are the only five rules, rendering all other arguments irrelevant.Aliveatoms (talk) 00:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. made the identical recommendation on six AfDs in quick succession. —C.Fred (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets the general notability guidelines based on the references section. —C.Fred (talk) 01:10, 19 July 2009 (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.