Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manuel López (artist) (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:39, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Manuel López (artist)
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Very recently discussed at AfD and deleted. Speedy for this new version was declined, despite the fact that the new version is still a notability fail. More discussion on the article talk page. --- Possibly (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Pinging users who participated in the last AfD:, --- Possibly (talk) 01:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , You forget some editors from the last AfD. Netherzone (talk) 01:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I missed and  but think I now have pinged everyone who participated. Please add a ping if I missed anyone. --- Possibly (talk) 01:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 01:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 01:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:NARTIST and WP:SIGCOV. As stated in the previous AFD, the Los Angeles Times article is the only quality reference on the subject, and therefore there simply is not enough RS to meet WP:GNG. I suggest Extended confirmed protection to prevent article recreation for the closing admin, otherwise this will keep popping up at AFD.4meter4 (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep – The article should be retained in the encyclopedia, as the artist clearly meets WP:BASIC. The previous version of this article that was deleted was better than this one, and if I can find/make the time to improve this version I will incorporate that material, however I’m travelling for a critical personal matter and don’t know that I can get to it before this closes. This Chicano artist 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, the Los Angeles Music Center, Downtown Los Angeles News, The Eastsider, Boyle Heights Beat and more. Their work has been included in two museum shows. He meets WP:BASIC. As an aside, I want to say that I find it gut-wrenching when student editors’ good-faith efforts are deleted before they have enough time to develop an article (this one was first deleted 35 minutes after it was created). The school semester is not even over yet, their article has been nominated for deletion twice, and I sincerely doubt the student editor knew they were doing anything "wrong", esp. since they were assigned this artist. Netherzone (talk) 01:51, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * what you are saying about the sources significant coverage (not just mentions) from the likes of the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Music Center, Downtown Los Angeles News, The Eastsider, Boyle Heights Beat and more. is mostly untrue, and I am confused as to why you would keep repeating it. We went over this last time:
 * Los Angeles Times: an excellent source.
 * Music center: a commission, contains zero independent reporting.
 * Downtown Los Angeles News: 1 sentence.
 * The Eastsider: 2 sentences
 * Boyle Heights Beat: not included in this article as far as I can see.
 * So we are in the same situation as a last time: one good source and some trivial mentions.--- Possibly (talk) 02:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , I am not in a position at this time to get into this back-and-forth with you again. I stand by my !vote of Keep. Netherzone (talk) 02:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok then. I also think it is wrong to characterize this as bad for students. Failure to hit the mark in any field of study is an important part of learning; we should not loosen our standards for universities that use Wikipedia as part of their instruction.--- Possibly (talk) 02:13, 26 April 2021 (UTC)


 * This is just a note to show the differences between the mainspace article and the draft, which may explain why the speedy deletion request was declined: Differences in sourcing are [], [], [],[], [] Vexations (talk) 01:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per Netherzone. Hear, hear, well said. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:00, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per Netherzone. and all above. Purosinaloense T/K 12:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Draftify recreating a recently deleted article instead of publishing a draft and submitting it through the WP:AFC looks like a bad idea. Is it a WP:COI contribution? --Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , I was not going to post again here, however, this has gone too far. How on earth did you come to the "conclusion" that a student editor who was assigned this artist for a class assignment (this info is easy to find) is now being accused of a Conflict of Interest on her talk page and here? Her article has already been nominated for deletion twice (the first time 35 minutes after it was created; the second time in less than a day). I have no connection to this student editor, her university nor the artist, but it sure seems like bullying at worst and intimidation at best is going on. Good grief you guys, let the student at least get a grade on her efforts! I googled the university calendar and there is only a week until the semester is over. Jeez, talk about turning off potential new editors! Couldn't you simply wait a week? I honestly do not care about this artist's article, but the behavior towards this student editor is appalling. Netherzone (talk) 20:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * sorry, didn't realise it was a student editor. COI tag removed, comment posted at the user's Talk page. I still think, however, that the article should be draftified. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * there are no special rules for student editors. I very much doubt that having the article in article space has anything to do with their grade, and if it does that is a problem for the teacher who requires it, not us. I don't think there is any COI here. However suggesting that a group of editors gets a break from long-established notability rules is fundamentally wrong. I appreciate your compassionate approach, but compassion has nothing to do with the notability policy for determining which articles are kept. --- Possibly (talk) 21:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep, per Netherzone. JayzBox (talk) 07:19, 27 April 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.