Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mistigris


 * 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 due to an apparent lack of notability-supporting coverage in reliable sources. Our standards for notability have evolved significantly since 2006, so the result of the previous AfD is not especially relevant today. RL0919 (talk) 06:07, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Mistigris

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

This article was nominated for deletion (as part of a group of articles) on July 28, 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep. When reviewing the deletion discussion some of the parties had conflicts regarding this article. I would suggest that the topic was never notable, that the entry is a fan essay, the topic has no coverage from 2006. The website listed seems to be active (I am removing a section which links to zipfiles)  I would also ask if this article would meet today's article standards? Flibbertigibbets (talk) 01:47, 23 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Findings;
 * Link https://paleotronic.com/2019/10/16/back-from-the-dead-the-life-death-and-resurrection-of-computer-art-group-mistigris/
 * Small blurb;
 * https://www.mobygames.com/company/mistigris Flibbertigibbets (talk) 02:00, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps List https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_artscene_groups


 * The paleotronic.com source is not significant. And rest are just passing mentions. RoostTC (please ping me when replying) 02:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete SOS Mistigris is a thing in France, as are most hits on this name. Not sure what this collective is supposed to be, the article has no inline references and it seems pointless trying to find any if the aticle's been this bad since 2006. Just delete it. They can recreate it using proper formatting and refs and what have you. These unsourced articles from the early wiki days still haunt us. Oaktree b (talk) 03:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * "Most hits" in what, Google? Notability should not be a function of SEO. People need to be looking into websites that cover an art scene to determine notability within the scene, unless you are arguing that that scene as a whole is not notable enough to have articles on individual artists/collectives - in which case the discussion scope should be bigger than one group's article. HunterZ (talk) 21:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * To clarify, there is nothing in Google aobut this group, I only get hits on the France group as described. You can try another search engine, but still nothing found. SEO isn't the issue, the lack of sourcing is. We need proof why they are important and I can't find any. Oaktree b (talk) 16:16, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Hey, friends. Greetings from the Mistigris founder and chief administrator.  We enjoy the feather in our cap that a Wikipedia article confers upon our organization, but I see despite our longevity our article is again on uncertain footing.  If there are specific issues with the article I'd love to help fix them; if instead the contention is that we are inadequately notable then, alas, I'm not sure anything can be done for us.  Tens of thousands of artworks exhibited by hundreds of artists for nearly 30 years... all these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.  I could point to references to us in video documentaries but if you want print acknowledgements we're likely out of luck.  Let me know! Pseudo Intellectual (talk) 19:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Artistic contributor to the Mistigris art collection here to confirm it's a real thing. Please inform what is needed to update the article. Please also note that much of the demoscene is not covered in text articles which are easily accessible outside of zip files, bbs boards and demoscene websites. I hope you do not apply this metric to other scener groups - the scene relies on things like Wikipedia for historical documentation. Polyducks (talk) 20:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Reply Hey and, take a look at WP:NORG, especially the WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND sections. Can you provide links to any sources that independently discuss this group and provide in-depth information on it? That is the primary criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing++ 16:17, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Was there any coverage of the group in local enthusiast publications or the local computer press? We used to get localized version of Canada Computes back in the day, where all the local computer shops would advertise hardware pricing and the paper would cover tech topics or other computer nerd stories that were only relevant to the local area of publication. Oaktree b (talk) 16:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't find significant coverage by any independent reliable sources to support notability. ( Note: this afd came to my notice via twitter. ) Schazjmd   (talk)  21:11, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

— Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been canvassed to this discussion. (Twitter) Seddon talk 08:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting even though there is preponderance of editors advocating Deletion as the discussion is still very active today. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:43, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep They are currently both the featured group on https://16colo.rs and have multiple entries on the front page, so I really don't understand picking on this particular group's article. If you're going to delete this, then the whole category of scene groups that each have their own article ought to get collapsed into a shared article that mentions them all. HunterZ (talk) 21:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @HunterZ, can you provide any sources that meet the criteria of WP:ORGCRIT? Schazjmd   (talk)  21:46, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm confused - are you asserting that 16colo.rs is unreliable, or are you asserting that it's in a disqualifying relationship with Mistigris? HunterZ (talk) 22:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * It's an archive, that doesn't contribute to notability. Schazjmd   (talk)  22:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * You know what? Forget it. I'm tired of this petty gatekeeping garbage and have retired my Wikipedia account. This was the last straw. Do some research yourself to improve the article instead of sitting there and arm-chairing the worthiness of people's contributions. HunterZ (talk) 03:53, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * We judge the sourcing using an established set of criteria, same for all contributions here. Otherwise, this website loses credibility and anyone can write an article about anything. Oaktree b (talk) 16:18, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * HunterZ appears to have retired from Wiki; the user's been around as long as I have. I would assume they understand GNG and the need for reliable sources. Regardless, I think we would only find coverage of this group in local paper sources published at the time, that likely aren't even online. Oaktree b (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep an archive is a publication in the demoscene. The contributions of art by various groups are distributed as zips on a monthly, yearly or adhoc basis. The means of distribution for information is not a criteria for whether or not it's notable. 16colors is a notable, independent publisher inside the demoscene which comments frequently on Mistigris and other demoscene groups. If you do not want to download a zip, they are openly available and readable on the 16colo.rs website.
 * Also notable is that the demoscene groups are in competition with underlying demoscene drama. Removing one benefits other scener groups, which brings into question why the article is being flagged for deletion in the first place.
 * Further, I argue that Mistigris is an important scener group that has contributed to the demoscene in multiple ways. It's also one of the last remaining active scener groups that distributes artwork independently through zip archives. It's notable and important in its field. Polyducks (talk) 08:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * there is this book:
 * https://books.google.com.ar/books/about/Underground_Computer_Groups_Artscene_Gro.html?id=4ZmiSgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
 * and huge lots of visual artworks if you write "mistigris ansi" on google images.
 * Checs / HPM 190.17.188.183 (talk) 02:57, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that book is based on Wikipedia;; it says so right in the description. Schazjmd   (talk)  14:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Regrettably Delete. In good faith I went to see if I could find anything that would help this article meet the needs of Wikipedia's notability guidelines and regrettably nothing but passing mentions or primary sources. Seddon talk 08:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment A question being raised here is how can artwork created and stored in a transitory "computer memory and storage" be preserved?  Wikipedia seems to be the only remaining pointer to this particular body of work?  Wikipedia has about eleven existing articles which mention Ansi art which represent the subject in overview.   Any specific artwork including NFT's or ansi can go hard copy; be presented in a media presentation, can be self-published in a book, can find its way into galleries, find its way into the press, can be collected by individuals, and can be curated.
 * Flibbertigibbets (talk) 23:19, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking for sources and support There is a twitter thread rallying folks to this afd - there are two points being made  1) the art speaks for itself 2) the loss of a wikipedia entry equates to the loss of credibility Flibbertigibbets (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Preservation: Preservation of the digital artwork has not been a big issue for the underground PC computer art community as due to the way in which artpack releases are announced, tabulated, catalogued and distributed virtually, the collections enter online archives which are mirrored for redundancy. We maintain a complete list of all of our artpack releases at our homepage at www.mistigris.org -- there are over a hundred of them and they go back to October of 1994.  Listings of the artpacks and their contents are also maintained at, among other places, the 16colo.rs gallery (eg. https://16colo.rs/group/mistigris ) and the Demozoo database of demoscene activity (eg. https://demozoo.org/groups/22737/ ) .  Virtually all the artwork remains in circulation.
 * (Wikipedia formerly had quite a bit more than eleven articles on the subject; many of them did not survive the 2006 deletion proposal or were merged into the Minor Artscene Groups article. I can't explain how this article survived at that time, but since reviving in 2014 we have had much more activity and reached quite a bit more people (with thousands of followers across multiple social media accounts) than we ever did during the initial period documented extensively in this article -- which, absolutely, warrants rewriting to place the emphasis more on our second act than our historical origins.)
 * Art by our contributors has gone hard copy; you can find us mentioned and our artwork shown in "The Masters of Pixel Art vol. 2" artbook. That may not be sufficient for notability but it's a start.  (The Paleotronic magazine mentioned and dismissed above was also a real magazine with a subscriber base and a print run.)  We have also had work exhibited in real-world gallery contexts -- just a couple of weeks ago, our art was included in an exhibition in Argentina.  Several of the artworks in the top-right photo at https://flashparty.rebelion.digital/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=107:flash-expo-en-el-ccgsm-en are from Mistigris artists.  If you could zoom in on the artist cards you would see us mentioned and acknowledged.  But if this exhibition does not circulate a catalogue online, is that something we can tap to establish notability?
 * An issue with underground cultural phenomena is that by their nature, they do not receive a great deal of coverage by mainstream media. I can find references to our activities from among our colleagues (who fill stadiums with their "demoparty" conventions), embedded in other computer artworks and online video reviews and documentaries, but without any of us being endowed with honorary notability by a notable media entity from the offline world, none of the references are considered valid: un-notable organizations acnkowledging each other.
 * Since the deletion notice we have hastily explored our opportunities for enshrinement in print media in eg. (surely highly notable) academic journals etc. by outside parties who believe in our notability. The wheels are in motion but there will be months of waiting ahead before anything goes to print.  Maybe it will support the next incarnation of this article.
 * Pseudo Intellectual (talk) 19:39, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. A very interesting article, and I feel like we'd loose important history of the early internet by removing it. But, since it's not covered by independent sources, it should be deleted. SWinxy (talk) 02:10, 1 December 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.