Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post 20th Century Art


 * 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. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Post 20th Century Art

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD. The article violates the Wikipedia policy on neologisms WP:NOTNEO. There are not may reliable sources that use the term, and I could find no reliable sources that actually discuss the term. Inks.LWC (talk) 01:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  —Inks.LWC (talk) 01:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Article's claim is that the term has been used by instructors in one college. No evidence that this has enjoyed even the most general usage, let alone an application specific to representational painting. 76.248.147.81 (talk) 02:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Ignoring that the use of this quite general term for something apparently specific is a bit of a problem, as a neologism, this has no demonstrable currency outside of two professors at a school. Unless more sources can be provided to show that the term is in use for this particular art movement, rather than any art made after December 31, 1999 (yes, I start the 21st century in 2000), this will have to be deleted.  freshacconci  talk talk  02:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete for now. My Google research shows that the expression is being used pretty much as in the article. But it does not seem to be established enough to pass WP's notability bar yet. Steve Dufour (talk) 23:02, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well now I'm curious: Are there reliable sources that use the term in the context of traditional figuration, or that refer specifically to such a movement in painting? 76.248.147.81 (talk) 23:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't see anything "reliable" WP-wise, just blogs and so forth. But the concept is out there. Steve Dufour (talk) 04:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Freshacconci. Hardly a sentence in this Synthesis doesn't invite a Citation reqd. (A "boom of new art schools and Ateliers" - interesting if it is happening and can feed into an article once it does.) AllyD (talk) 19:47, 21 June 2011 (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.