Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jorge Azar


 * 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. slakr \ talk / 06:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Jorge Azar

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability not established, just a few press releases here, and Google turns up little. JNW (talk) 13:47, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - the first two supporting refs appear to be blurbs accompanying items for sale and at least one of those is self penned by the artist. The third ref from La Salita appears a little better, but I have no idea how solid a source La Salita is in itself. It could be a forum for self-marketing artists or a local art club, I genuinely have no idea. As per JNW, a google search brings nothing. In the absence of something more solidly supporting notability I think it's a delete. da nn o _ u k  17:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Uruguay-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete I can find very little apart from Facebook and Linked in, fails WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 14:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep After further edits particularly by user NYartreview, whatever remains of the article could be saved. werldwayd (talk) 00:39, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * User NYartreview has been blocked for reasons beyond my paygrade, however it seems to have been an account almost purely devoted to supporting this article. No further refs have been added, merely content removed in an attempt to stymie accusations of unsupported claims. Nothing new in terms of supporting notability. da nn o _ u k  02:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep I checked the references one by one in spanish. All of them appear to be cultural organisations with no commercial profile. No sign of promotion of works for sale, no prices, no shopping carts. All background check on these refs results in purely cultural organisations. The first ref Ciutatvellaoberta.org is the cultural branch of the Town Hall of the Historic City Valencia,Spain in charge of organising the cultural events for the city. It is a solid check. The second ref La Salita, is an established arts center in Asturias, Spain, the background check is also solid, with notable involvement in the cultural activities of the City of Asturias, including the Noche Blanca event which is the oldest urban art expo in Asturias. The third ref YICCA, is the less solid of the three, since it is an arts contest with no cultural activity apart from its own exhibitions. In my view, what is stated currently in the article could be saved, since it reflects notable and verifiable involvement of the artist in urban non-profit cultural activity, mainly in Spain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiapprentic (talk • contribs) 14:31, 17 March 2014 (UTC) Please see Sockpuppet investigations/NYartreview Theroadislong (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment It's difficult to imagine a weaker set of sources. The first two consist of a sentence or two each about the artist. The third and most voluminous is, at essence, a press release, and makes no claims that would support notability. JNW (talk) 14:41, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Sorry not to agree with you JNW. But it seems you did not check the refs thoroughly. In La Salita cultural org. this artist was named artist of the month and there is a full biography and exhibit of his paintings. Pls. revise the link http://www.lasalita.org/?page_id=1430. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiapprentic (talk • contribs) 14:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC) Please see Sockpuppet investigations/NYartreview Theroadislong (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thoroughly read, and for those who are not fluent in Portuguese, this is the rough translation:

''Creator of liquid crystal technique on acrylic painting. Random - his artistic signature is considered an "outsider" art scene, but it is well acclaimed by critics. He has made his mark by donating 100% of the profits from their works. His works and funds have been donated for many years to charities and NGOs around the world, including the United Nations, UNICEF, Doctors without Borders, and the list is endless. Azar exposed outside the circuit of art galleries, and closer circuit Cultural Centers. His work is restricted to no more than 10 to 12 jobs per year for specific customers who must make their donations directly to the charity of your choice before they make delivery of the artwork. His works have been acquired in recent years by major collectors who have made ​​generous donations to various works of Charity. Paintings Insignia : - Series "Women Striped " - series " Hope" - Series " glances ". Azar has been selected to exhibit their work at La Salita Cultural Center in 2013 and later his work was sent to the city of Valencia, where he was one of the works selected by the Government for exposure in the urban sample of Ciutat Vella Valencia .''


 * Per previous interpretations here, that's a press release. Trying to pass it off as something more substantive is misleading. JNW (talk) 15:09, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Thanks for your comment JNW. And it is correct what you translate. But all that content which you mention has already been elimnated from the article as expressed earlier by user werldwayd. That is why I agree with werldwayd that what is left in the article could be saved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiapprentic (talk • contribs) 15:35, 17 March 2014 (UTC) Please see Sockpuppet investigations/NYartreview Theroadislong (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Non-profit urban art is a developing form of art. I will follow up on this artist and make new contribs as they appear. In my view the article is a keep.--ArteHistoria (talk) 10:58, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Please see Sockpuppet investigations/NYartreview Theroadislong (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The discussion has nothing to do with non-profit urban art, only with the notability of a particular person. Please do add content from reliable sources that will help in this direction. To the closing administrator: I'm concerned about the development of WP:SPAs here that have showed up to vote 'keep', without offering a new or credible rationale. JNW (talk) 11:17, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Thank you for your comment JNW. I am new to wiki,and I thought Wiki was open to everyone. By the tone of your comment it looks like it is not. I specialize in art history and consider my view as valid as yours. I see a lot of emerging artists in my field and the one we are discussing about seems to have enough refs to stay in my view. It is my objective view, and I feel free to express it. You seem to have a grudge on this one...--ArteHistoria (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Please assume good faith, in order to have an article we need to be sure that they are notable enough to pass the general notability guide WP:GNG at the moment they do not appear to, but perhaps in the future they will. Theroadislong (talk) 12:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete no assertion of notability. Sources by no means strong enough. The licence release by the artist for the 2 pics on commons is so far just an assertion by the uploader, whose only 2 edits are uploading these. Johnbod (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete I could only find press releases and self-generated/social media content, even in Spanish. An interesting artist, perhaps a case of WP:TOOSOON at this point, but for now fails WP:GNG. § FreeRangeFrog croak 19:47, 21 March 2014 (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.