Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Miller (painter)


 * 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   delete. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

James Miller (painter)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Prod tag was removed after adding a single link to an article in a local weekly news mag more about allegedly being censored than any alleged noteworthy achievements. To get an article in Wikipedia for an artist there needs to be more than local coverage. DreamGuy (talk) 20:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. What was added isn't even an article but an interview. Fails WP:GNG. Huon (talk) 21:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, In Montreal, Quebec, and perhaps much of Canada, it would appear as though the most popular painting genre in terms of gallery sales/exhibition is mainstream decorative art. For the most part, abstract or landscape. Galleries that exhibit figurative works are few and far between, and in those, you'll most likely find more expressionist figurative works as opposed to, say, classic figurative realism. Gallery curators justifiably recognize that it's typically not a good business practice to exhibit works that antagonize or alienate their customer base. As such, they typically don't, and consequently, mainstream media doesn't go out of its way to promote controversial work that is not found for sale in mainstream galleries. After all, from a business perspective, what would be the upside? Many people are uncomfortable when confronted with criticism of their religion or collective behavior (politics). It turns them off. - Coming across contemporary realism expressing social commentary/criticism in the mainstream fine art world is rare. In Canada, perhaps even, non-existent. How many contemporary critical realists can you think of? The American painter Max Ginsburg is a good example but his works, however beautiful, are not overly controversial; certainly not to the extent that those who take offense to certain images or ideas would call (label) them offensive or disturbing. - Asking ourselves, does the article, James Miller (Painter), diminish the value of (or SPAM) Wikipedia? It's not clear to me that it does. - If one were to search for articles on contemporary social commentary/criticism in painting, might this article potentially be of any value? Would it be relevant?  I believe it likely would be. - In that contentious, politically incorrect, not-for-profit artwork, regardless of workmanship, is not likely to be embraced or promoted by for-profit industry and media, how might we reasonably expect it to meet Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion? - Would the intent of Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines truly be fulfilled by excluding this article? Not in my opinion.- Would Wikipedia, in excluding this article,  effectively be brushing honest, perhaps insightful, social commentary under the rug, because ultimately, it's not profitable for the industry to promote or recognize it? Effectively, yes. - I believe that this article is an exception to the rule and should not be removed. Bokomaru (talk) 19:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Hard to do a Google search, since the name's so common; but trying his name (both as "James" and as "Jamie") in combination with various keywords from the article and the Montreal Review piece didn't yield any evidence of significant coverage by independent sources. My searches turned up his website and the MR article often enough to persuade me that if there was such coverage, I'd have found it.  Fails WP:GNG.  The criteria at WP:ARTIST seem even stricter; the subject definitely doesn't seem to meet them.  Ammodramus (talk) 03:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Possible Delete.Google isn't reliable for searches of newspaper/ art journal coverage pre late 1990's,that being said,if no other  verifiable and reliable third party discussion of this artwork can be sourced,delete, Bokomaru's argument of political relevance  although of interest isn't neutral=WP:NOT, if  it is just  unreliably sourced opinion. Euartcurator (talk) 10:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * According to the article, Miller began painting in 2004, so I don't think we're missing any pre-Google coverage re. his art. Ammodramus (talk) 16:17, 14 January 2012 (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.