Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irene Zundel


 * 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.  A  Train talk 21:02, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Irene Zundel

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:CREATIVE--no works in permanent collection of major museums, no substantial third party critical studies.  DGG ( talk ) 08:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment there are some decent sources in Italian and Spanish, but (as nom says) she is not a particularly notable artist going by traditional indicators.104.163.139.33 (talk) 22:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep The article does not need to meet CREATIVE. It does pass GNG, however, with her and her works being featured in several RS in Spanish. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Commment I'm not quite sure what to make of it. There's some coverage that looks OK, like the article in El Pais, but other things bother me. What, for example, is the "Premio Italia per L'arte"? It could be all kinds of things: If it is the "Premio Italia Arte Contemporanea" it:Premio MAXXI that might be a good indicator for notability, but I don't think it is, and I can't find any record of Zundel receiving that award. There are other problems: The list of exhibits is vague to the point where it's difficult to ascertain the significance of the exhibit, "2017–2018: Berlin Germany (Jenseits Des Sichtbaren" doesn't tell us it that it was the inaugural exhibit at the "Instituto Cultural de México en Alemannia", which appears to have an exhibition space in the Mexican embassy in Berlin. If so, being selected to represent one's country might be a significant form of recognition. Vexations (talk) 12:50, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The source for the award is here. Also, remember, she doesn't need to pass CREATIVE. She only needs to pass GNG which she does. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:32, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That source says: "Irene se hizo acreedora al premio Italia Per L’Arte", without any further details. Before I agree that that establishes notability, I'd like to make sure which award that is, that it is in fact a notable award. Zundel has participated in exhibitions that are not mentioned in the article, but that are notorious vanity events, like the Florence Biennale. I'm not one to take just about any source as an indication that a subject is notable per GNG, I want to make sure that the source is correct. For now, before I commit to keep, I'd like to see some evidence that the "premio Italia Per L’Arte" exist, is notable, and when Zundel won it. And if I'm going to consider a list of exhibitions, I'd like to see the name of the venue, the location, a date, and an independent, reliable source, not the artist's own bio. I'm not sure if it's just sloppy or deliberately vague, but I don't like it. Vexations (talk) 22:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about that prize. Trying to research prizes in different languages is not my area of expertise. is a polyglot and may be able to weigh in here on the prize. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * But it is my area. I've contributed quite a bit to articles about art awards, and while I am not fluent in Spanish and Italian, I understand both well enough to read an article about a topic in an area I am familiar with. I find it a bit disconcerting that you accept a source as contributing to meeting the GNG while unable to evaluate a source that is in an area that is admittedly outside your area of expertise. If your support is based on a source that you cannot read and whose veracity or reliability you are not competent to evaluate, that ought to be clearer from your support statement. It seems pretty likely that thehappening.com (it says about itself "estamos presentes en los mejores eventos de la Ciudad de México en compañía de las marcas más exclusivas" is not a reliable source and that the mention of the award is copied straight from her bio at http://www.irenezundel.com/biografia.html including the unusual capitalization of Per and L' in Per L'arte. As far as I can tell, the Premio Italia per l'arte is a vanity award given out by the "Vetrina internazionale degli artisti latino americani" at a fair in the Palazzo degli Affari in Florence. It is not the same as the Premio Italia Arte Contemporanea that I mentioned above and it is not a notable award. Vexations (talk) 00:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I think your skepticism is well-founded if you are going by WP:CREATIVE. However I also think MLG is correct that the artist meets GNG, even if some sources appear sketchy.104.163.139.33 (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't thinkThe Happening is a great source. It was the one I found that had the award so I could cite it while I fixing up the article. I do think that the other sources, such as El Unversal, El Siglo de Torreon, El Pais, & La Jornada San Luis are reliable sources that help establish GNG. I think you're too hung up on trying to establish CREATIVE rather than looking at GNG for this article. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Megalibrarygirl and DGG, genuine question: why do we bother with WP:CREATIVE if we are only going to selectively apply it? If GNG Suffices, why do we even bother with WP:CREATIVE? A sincere question...104.163.139.33 (talk) 00:09, 25 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep: Generally notability seems to have been established.--Ipigott (talk) 06:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, albeit reluctantly. Of the notable sources (those that have their own Wikipedia article), the El Pais source is OK. The article in El Universal El Universal is not about the subject, but about the opening of the Cultural Institute in the Mexican Embassy in Berlin, and she receives only a mention. The Vanguardia source is massively misleading, because it suggest she participated in the Venice Biennale. That would pretty much establish notability instantly, if only it were true. Her work is shown during the event in a parallel exhibition that is not affiliated with the Venice Biennale and its curators. She did not represent Mexico at the 57th Biennale, that was Carlos Amorales. El Siglo de Torreón has got their biennials mixed up and can't tell the difference between the Venice and the Florence Biennale (one is REALLY important, the other a scam). La Jornada writes about the same exhibition as Vanguardia, but has it about right. In summary, there are two articles in independent reliable sources that are usable. This meets the GNG, then only by the slimmest of margins. It fails WP:ARTIST in almost every conceivable way and really ought to be completely rewritten to address the gross errors and misstatements in the sources. Vexations (talk) 21:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Why don't you apply some WP:TNT then?104.163.139.33 (talk) 00:05, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The relationship of NCREATIVE and the GNG has never been settled. My own opinion is that NCREATIVE is and should be an added requirement, except in cases where the notability as an artist is subsidiary to notability otherwise. The alternative way of looking at it is that NCREATIVE shows presumed notability, in the sense that we do not need to concern ourselves if the standard at GNG is unambiguously met--this is necessary because the key words in the GNG, particularly  independent  and substantialare capable of ambiguous interpretations.  DGG ( talk ) 04:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * My take on the secondary criteria is that they should be used only when GNG cannot be successfully applied. This happens occasionally and can be useful when GNG can't be satisfied, but we're pretty sure we're dealing with a notable person in their field. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * and on what basis do you think we can be "sure" of that? I thought whether the subject is "notable" is what we are trying to determine.  DGG ( talk ) 23:42, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. It would seem that there is no established policy for the use of WP:NCREATIVE.104.163.139.33 (talk) 21:11, 25 May 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.