Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milind Mulick


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Milind Mulick

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:ARTIST, not notable enough to pass SNG.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 06:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 06:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep A totally stellar artist and seems to be an author. Likely passes WP:SIGCOV.   scope_creep Talk  11:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - The article sourcing consisted of simple mentions of him; however I added a short piece (possibly a press release?) from Times of India that has two paragraphs on him. A BEFORE search only turned up social media, blog posts, and the Times of India piece I added. Unless better sourcing can be found, it's doubtful he can pass WP:GNG. Fails WP:NARTIST at this time, but I'm holding off on !voting for now to see if book reviews, museum collections, or exhibition reviews can be found. Netherzone (talk) 00:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - I've completed a BEFORE search, and unfortunatly all that turned up was social media, listings of workshops, mentions of his brand of paints, and book sales sites and blogs, not not SIGCOV. He may be well known, but he does not meet WP criteria for notability per GNG nor NARTIST. Netherzone (talk) 15:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment – searching for "मिलिंद मुळीक", the artist's name in Marathi, gives some additional resources. For example, there is an interesting article (approx 3,600 words) in Marathi about him, his art and his books, concluding with an interview with Mulick, at https://vishesh.maayboli.com/diwali-2010kaj/789 (translated version here).


 * I also seem to get different search results by searching on the alternative commonly used transliterations of his name: Mulik, Malik, Mulick, Mullick, etc. I am still going through the many search results, so will decide my !vote later – life is busy and I need to find time to make a proper assessment. — Hebrides (talk) 16:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if that's journalism, or a user-submitted social networking site, per the website: Maayboli.com, or Maayboli, is an online networking community that connects its members through networks of friends and through a variety of services that it provides to its members. and Maayboli: A Great resource directory and social network for Marathi language, Marathi People and Maharashtrian culture. - it's unclear if there is any editorial oversight, were you able to find that there is? Netherzone (talk) 18:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah I found this part and am a little confused what the website is for. Sometimes it looks like news and other times like a newsletter. That's not a bad thing and I'm not knocking it, I just had problems establishing if this was a news site or a blogging site.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 00:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment It looks to me like he is more known for his books and teaching than his artwork. Kind of like a Bob Ross. Daniel Smith (art materials) has a line of watercolors under his name. So he is a successful, well-known teacher and commercial artist. He doesn't seem to be in any major collection or exhibitions, so I don't think he passes WP:NARTIST. All of the coverage I saw on an internet search was promotional for his classes, youtube videos, books, and paints (as well as interviews). WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:38, 5 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment – There is an interesting article about Mulick (about 500 words) in The New Indian Express that appears to satisfy WP:GNG. The article provides "significant coverage" and, as far as I can see, the New Indian Express would seem to be a reliable source, independent of the subject. Any thoughts? — Hebrides (talk) 10:55, 5 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:GNG ("A topic is to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received  in  that are "). After considerable searching I would like to propose the following sources as significant, reliable and independent in order to satisfy the WP:GNG criteria:
 * An article (about 500 words) in The New Indian Express about Mulick's life, education and art, with a photograph of the artist at work, at https://www.newindianexpress.com/magazine/2017/oct/07/watercolour-wonders-1667388--1.html – this is a significant article and I consider The New Indian Express (founded in 1932) to be a reliable and independent source
 * An article (over 400 words) on the Marathi News website from the publishers of Dainik Bhaskar about Mulick's work and career, written in Marathi, at https://divyamarathi.bhaskar.com/news/MAG-artist-2296035.html – (translation here) – this is "significant coverage" and independent of the subject, and this news item from DB Corp, India's largest newspaper group, could reasonably be assumed to be reliable
 * A further article (about 500 words) in the same publication as (2) reviewing his book Watercolor Landscapes Step by Step, at https://divyamarathi.bhaskar.com/news/MAG-watercolor-paintings-2189908.html – (translation here) – again, I consider this to be significant, reliable and independent of the subject


 * For the record, I have no connection with this artist or with either of the publications – I just came across the article when checking new articles a few days ago. I am looking to expand the article slightly, using information from these and other new references, but have a bit more work to do on this material before making changes. I wanted first to establish notability – after all, WP:ARTN makes it clear that notability is a property of the subject, irrespective of the quality or completeness of the Wikipedia article, and WP:NEXIST means we can consider the above sources before I have cited them in the article.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comments on the rationale above are welcome. Thank you to all who have contributed to this discussion. — Hebrides (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment – I have now updated and filled out the article, including references for all new material added. — Hebrides (talk) 08:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep based on the sources above, I think it just passes GNG. Not very detailed or lengthy, but there they are. Oaktree b (talk) 03:56, 9 September 2022 (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.