Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Markus Winter


 * 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. With two exceptions, all "keep" opinions are by new accounts and are discounted because of WP:COI / WP:SOCK concerns.  Sandstein  14:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Markus Winter

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to lack significant coverage in reliable sources. It's possible that his gallery might be notable, but apart from the New York Times reference in the article (which is only a passing mention of him and is actually more about his gallery than himself), the references in the article are mostly about what's in his gallery rather than him specifically, or press releases. I couldn't find enough significant coverage actually about him. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Agree with nominator; there is nothing substantial about the subject. What he sells may be notable, but he hasn't received significant critical attention himself. Mduvekot (talk) 14:03, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 3 articles in Die Welt and 2 NYTs that discuss him and his work should be considered sufficient for GNG, no? Agricola44 (talk) 15:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The NYT pieces are not substantially about him, though. One sentence in : "Markus Winter, the gallery’s owner, said that only a few of the show’s pieces have a clear provenance trail." ] quotes him and has "Marcus Winter, who organized the show with Brian Kish of the Brian Kish Gallery on Greene Street in SoHo, said it was the first about the architect in America." and "It took Mr. Winter almost two years to put the show together." Mduvekot (talk) 21:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, the 2004 NYT mentions him in several places. Importantly, it acknowledges i.e. notes him as an art historian ("Mr. Winter, an art historian from Düsseldorf, Germany") and it frames him as an authority by reporting his assessment on a historical matter ("'Ulrich was one of the last modern designers who cared about craftsmanship,' Mr. Winter said."). The 2 Die Welt articles have even more detail. Taken as a whole, these sources frame Winter as a recognized authority in this area of art history. Agricola44 (talk) 16:22, 10 May 2017 (UTC).
 * There is probably a legitimate case to be made that most of the claims in the article can be verified with as few as two or three of the sources. There is one piece in particular from Die Welt that has some biographical info that is not completely peripheral: this. For me, it's a bit too thin, considering the promotional tone of the sources by Andrea Hilgenstock (all the Zeit articles are by her), the lack of any support for Winter's status as an expert by real scholars in a relevant field in stead of newspaper editors, and the sudden appearance of User:Bennyflower whose very first contribution to Wikipedia was this !vote and User:Leonachtlicht, whose second edit to Wikipedia was to contest the speedy deletion nomination. There's something wrong with this article. It stretches my inclination to believe that all contributors to the article and this discussion are here to contribute in good faith without a conflict of interest beyond its limits. Of course, I'd be happy to revert my assertion if a satisfactory explanation for their sudden involvement can be provided by the two editors I mentioned. Mduvekot (talk) 00:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There's no question of the SPA-nature of those 2 accts – I even tagged one of them as such. However, the salient debate is not about them, but about Winter. And, I also agree that there's no scholarly proof that he's an expert, but his opinion/work/gallery has undeniably appeared in Germany's main national daily...and, to me, this seems to be a textbook case of what we mean by GNG. I am the first to admit that GNG is blatantly and widely misused nowadays to shoehorn into WP local arts people having no relevance beyond their own town, but I don't think we'd be guilty of that here with material from NYT & Die Welt. Best, Agricola44 (talk) 01:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep His publications are referred to by all four major auction houses dealing in design: Sotheby's, Christie's, Phillips and Wright. His exhibitions are well reviewed not only by the New York Time but the Neue Zuericher Zeitung, Die Welt, Architectural Digest, Elle Decor and Vogue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonachtlicht (talk • contribs)


 * Delete This seems like a promotional piece. Agree per nominator that subject is not non-notable. Netherzone (talk) 03:18, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep As a german design historian Markus Winter is of course a prominent person. He is one a few world wide leading experts in the field of pioneering design in the early 1900 to 1930ies in Germany and has made signifikant contributions to the relation and the worth of this design decade beside the German Bauhaus.He is currently working on the first documentation about that field and does a groundbreaking work for the understanding of the creative cultural forces in early 20th century Germany. It is not only an important part of design history, it is also a new view in cultural history and will alter the common view about how we looking to that very special period. So I prefer to hold the wikipedia source and think it also will be enhanced soon. NOT to be deleted! Bennyflower (talk) 20:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * — Bennyflower (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete This is a promotional article that tried to fluff up a non-notable curator/historian/antiques dealer who has had a few passing mentions in good pubs. There simply isn't much there when you start scratching the surface, i.e. GNG is not satisfied for WP:Academic or any other criteria really. I had a closer look at the sources while converting four or five improper inline URLS to refs-- there is not much meat on these bones. Bennyflower and Leonachtlicht, the two keep votes, appear to be likely SPA's as well.198.58.162.149 (talk) 04:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Extensive piece in Die Welt and 2 NYT articles that discuss him and his work/gallery are enough for GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 12:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. I agree that the keep !votes are not based on any actual Wikipedia policies (although I think SPA might be a bit far), and that although there has been much mention of the NYT articles, they only discuss Winter in the context of his gallery / exhibitions. They are not about he himself. Thus they are great sources for his gallery, etc., but poor for the individual. I cannot find sufficient independent third-party reliable sources to indicate depth or persistence of coverage at this time: (blogs and zines, excluding the passing mentions). Fails WP:ANYBIO.  &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  12:57, 9 May 2017 (UTC).
 * Comment. WP:NOTINHERITED is usually interpreted to mean that a person isn't notable just because a relative is notable. It can also mean that some facet of a person's work isn't notable just because the person is notable. However, you're arguing the reverse here, that Winter isn't notable, even though his work has been widely noted. A person is notable if they've done notable work. And, for the record, the 2 NYTs do discuss his work, the Die Welt article discusses him and his work in detail, and there are at least 2 other Die Welt articles in the bib that discuss him and his work. You have to go through some pretty good mental gymnastics to argue that this sort of sourcing does not satisfy GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC).
 * It's also frequently used to argue against keeping articles of people who have merely collaborated with famous people without any in-depth coverage of their own work. In this case, that Markus Winter curated exhibitions with works from famous articles is not ipso facto proof of his notability. The fact that news organizations reported more on the famous artworks in the exhibitions and much less (if any) about Markus Winter's role, would militate against finding Winter notable in this case. Even if we accept that a curator is a creative professional and exhibitions are their works, it's unclear how Markus Winter would meet WP:CREATIVE without making every single curator who managed to successfully assemble an exhibition by notable artists themselves notable. Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:41, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, I'm not arguing his notability from a technical perspective. I'm pointing out the fact that several of the world's main news outlets, like NYT and Die Welt, have covered him, his work, his gallery, etc. on multiple occasions. This phenomenon, to have been noted, is indeed the crux of passing GNG. It's really that simple. You're arguing up a different tree, saying a book he wrote is not widely held and such. That may be true, but it's irrelevant. Cheers. Agricola44 (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not convinced that the available sources demonstrate that Winter meets our notability guidelines. Also, using WorldCat, I was unable to find the first listed book, but the second one is held by three institutions, one of which, the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, literally holds every modern German book published. The only other book I found in WorldCat was held four times. This does not seem like the output of notable art historian. Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as neither the subject nor his work meet notability criteria. Ifnord (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This discussion has developed pretty far beyond just making assertions. I still can't see any convincing justification that multiple articles in 2 national dailies do not satisfy GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. He is the only source with significant stock of German expressionist furniture by architects such as Oskar Kaufmann, Fritz August Breuhaus and Leo Nachtlicht.Kidflave1 (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * After your unsourced contribution to Markus Winter, your keep vote is your second contribution to Wikipedia. I have to wonder; how do you know that Winter "is the only source with significant stock of German expressionist furniture". That doesn't appear in any independent, reliable sources. Mduvekot (talk) 03:45, 22 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per - there has been significant coverage in good sources. Taken as a whole, Times, Digest, Welt, all add up. Ordinary editing can remove the puffery. Bearian (talk) 14:37, 25 May 2017 (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.