Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manuel López (artist)


 * 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. There seems to be consensus that there is only 1 in-depth source (LA Times), but disagreement whether that satisfies GNG or not. GNG clearly specifying multiple sources, this appears to be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Randykitty (talk) 13:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Manuel López (artist)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable artist, fails WP:NBIO. Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete It is WP:TOOSOON. The LA Times article is excellent coverage. However, there seems to be basically no other coverage. I think they will be notable after three or four independent reviews are written.--- Possibly (talk) 21:31, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - This Chicano artist from Boyle Heights is in the early stages of their career, yet they have received enough significant coverage (not just mentions) from the likes of the Los Angeles Times, Juxtapoz magazine, the Los Angeles Music Center and more, and their work has been included in two museum shows. He meets WP:BASIC. I've improved the article since the nomination. Netherzone (talk) 21:42, 18 March 2021 (UTC) I also wanted to mention that it was just created today by a student editor (who did a pretty good job) and I think we should support these educational initiatives. I'm hoping the editor will continue to improve the article as well. Netherzone (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I kind of agree with Netherzone here, but perhaps we can update WP:NARTIST a bit an explain what an emerging artist is, what an established artist is and why an encyclopedia typically has entries on one but not the other. I'm sorry for the well intentioned folks who try to write articles about emerging artists only to find their efforts rewarded with an AfD, but perhaps try to focus on subjects with a significant body of work instead. Vexations (talk) 21:55, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The Music Center piece contains no original reporting: it's an artist statement and a biography. The Juxtapoz piece does not mention him at all. Am I missing something? I appreciate the work you did on cleaning up the article. But the fact remains that only two of the ten sources is actual independent reporting, the LA Times and an independent blog (rafa.la) that does not look like a great source. The rest are announcements, boilerplate and trivial coverage.--- Possibly (talk) 07:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , the Music Center piece is a documentary they produced/featured on him. That spotlight is pretty significant to my way of thinking. You are right about the Juxtapoz article - my goof, it covered the museum show, but he's not mentioned in the article. I really think we need to look at the work of an artist like López contextually within the framework of Chicano culture and the Chicano Movement within East L.A./Border Art - which does not fit neatly into "artworld" paradigms (shiny white walls in pristine spaces of New York, London, Paris, Dusseldorf - you know what I mean.) I remember having a somewhat similar conversation with you some years ago about the New Mexican-Chicana/Latina muralist Bernadette Vigil when her article was up for deletion. Neither artists are exactly "outsider" artists, but their work does exist outside of the big-bucks power dynamics of the mainstream "art world". López (or Vigil) do not fit nicely into low-brow art because the work is not ironic or campy, it's sincere. And they are recognized - not exactly as a bridge between these worlds, but for their contributions within their specific vernacular. I stand by my !vote that he meets WP:BASIC and that the article should be kept. Netherzone (talk) 14:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You are one of my favourite editors on Wikipedia and in this rare instance, I do not agree with you. The Music Center piece is simply them lending their web platform to local artists-- can you point me to the original content? their page says as much ". More than 35 artists in total will be featured with a platform to express their views of Los Angeles that are relevant and reflective of the current time through music, dance and visual culture." The part of you argument abut him being Chicano and seeing his work contextually is just an instance of WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. The fact remains that there is only one in-depth independent source.--- Possibly (talk) 14:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , and you are one of my favorite editors, and we disagree (respectfully of course!) on this. The Music Center series was curated - see the LA Downtown News citation just added. IMO the MC video is analogous to an article in this case - the citation states that he was a featured as a launch artist (launching the series). He's getting alot of attention for an emerging artist who doesn't fit neatly into art world boxes. He's not an outsider artist, he's an outlier -- so my argument is not about righting great wrongs as it is that outliers are pretty much ignored by art world power dynamics, I'm saying that we can try to examine his work as best as possible through the lens of his culture. I agree he's borderline N per WP guidelines, but I don't think its TOOSOON. I think retaining the article is a net positive for the encyclopedia and to delete it would be a loss. Netherzone (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The Music Center isnot independent then: the content was entirely written/created by the article subject. So that leaves one good source in the article. I'm not immune to your arguments here, but it's WP:TOOSOON. --- Possibly (talk) 15:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per Netherzone. The Los Angeles Times article adds to the notability of this artist working, living, and chronicling the nature and events of East L.A. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * GNG does say multiple sources...--- Possibly (talk) 15:00, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment moving the article to draft is a possible resolution here. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 08:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , that is an idea, in the event that the AfD goes in the direction of delete. The draft could be moved back to the student editor's sandbox; I also volunteer to incubate it in my sandbox. May I ask why you nominated it for deletion less than an hour after creation by a good-faith student editor who was assigned this local artist? Should not student editors' efforts have a microscopic chance especially at this time when so many are struggling with non-in-person interfaces with their teachers? It was AfD'd about 35 minutes after the student created it, and they even stated in their edit summary that they were still "experimenting" with learning how to edit. What a buzz kill; another new editor bites the dust. I apologize for ranting. I stand by my !vote to retain the article, as I'm convinced that this emerging artist, with two museum shows, several group shows, an article in the LA times, a curated commission from the LA Music Center, and other attention meets WP:BASIC. Netherzone (talk) 15:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * come on, you know that WP:BASIC only mentions "multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other" and not all the other things you are giving as a reason to keep? --- Possibly (talk) 15:49, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Lest you think I’ve gone nuts or am worthy of a slap with a slice or two of baloney, I have already said it’s borderline notability and offered an alternative to deletion (draftify/userfy) if not kept. I realize I’m being uncharacteristically generous but I do feel the article has merit. A notability maintenance tag would have been a better option than AfD. These sources are not as strong as the LA Times article, yet they are all independent from the artist and each other and thus, to my mind count towards WP:BASIC. I agree that he does not meet WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST.Downtown Los Angeles News – This was and may still be a print publication since 1972 – it’s probably now online only but I don’t know for sure if they stopped the print version. More info about Downtown LA News here: This source is fine and  counts towards notability.The Eastsider – Yes it is a neighborhood news blog, and it has been named the best of neighborhood news blogs by L.A. Magazine and L.A. Weekly. More info about the Eastsider here:  I think this is fine can be counted toward notability.Boyle Heights Beat – Not for profit community news source. More info about Boyle Heights Beat here:  I think its independent and can count towards notability.RAFA.LA – a blog that does not contribute to notability as it has a sole writer info about the blog writer here: However, I think the RAFA.LA citation that is currently in the article should stay in the article.Curate.la – It’s an event listing/press release, so does not contribute to notability, but it has some good info for the article. Netherzone (talk) 17:06, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Last reply as I'm getting tired of pointing out the inaccuracies in claims: this supposed source does not even mention Lopez.--- Possibly (talk) 17:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , That was info about the writer of the blog, sorry if that was not clear, I stated that it (the blog) does not contribute to notability. The link here was provided for info about the blog writer not Lopez. Netherzone (talk) 17:19, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Possibly. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 06:08, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd like to hear from User:Nstrathman and User:Ian (Wiki Ed) who are listed on Wiki_Ed/California_State_University,_San_Bernardino/Art_History_Methodologies_(Spring) as Instructor and Wikipedia Expert, respectively. And of course from the creator of the article, User:Mylissa_I. Vexations (talk) 19:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * on principle, I don't weigh in on the merits of student articles (I think there would be COI concerns if I were to). In this case, apparently the student moved their work to mainspace prematurely, and I'd have moved it back to their sandbox had I discovered it sooner, but since it's at AFD that isn't really an option. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , in that case, the outcome of this AfD, if it is not keep, ought to be at a minimum to userfy the article, per WP:ATD-I. Deletion is not acceptable to me. The student who should have the opportunity to continue to participate in the course, and deletion would prevent that. Vexations (talk) 15:46, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Userfy is a good idea. I also did not realize this got AfD'd 35 minutes after it was created.--- Possibly (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per points made by Netherzone. The subject has had several exhibitions, including a solo gallery exhibition, plus the Los Angeles Times is significant coverage to show notability. Passes WP:BASIC and meets WP:GNG. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 02:06, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Netherzone's points are good ones, unfortunately they highlight the fact that this is most likely a case of WP:TOOSOON, currently does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:NARTIST.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:29, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete or Draftify. Fails WP:NARTIST and WP:SIGCOV. There is really only one excellent source, and ultimately this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. I would be ok with moving this to draft space where the author can continue to build the article as new sources emerge. Once there is some more coverage to pass GNG, it can then be moved into main space.4meter4 (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2021 (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.