Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richie Williamson


 * 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. Other than the article's creator, unanimous consensus that this fails WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:51, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Richie Williamson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I didn't find enough references for him to pass WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE Arthistorian1977 (talk) 17:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:27, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:28, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Richie Williamson was nominated for deletion based on WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE:

I have added two additional reliable sources to further establish WP:GNG defined: “If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list”
 * •Reference 3. "On your own: David Anderson and Elizabeth Gottlieb". Retrieved 2018-09-25.
 * This source establishes published content regarding recognized costume design from 1981. Recording available in public domain at New York Public Library.
 * •Reference 4. Raynor, Vivien. "ART: 'KARL BODMER'S AMERICA' AT THE METROPOLITAN". Retrieved 2018-09-25.
 * -This New York Times Article establishes the presence of Williamson’s work being featured at the Metropolitan in 1985.

In regard to qualification for WP:CREATIVE, existing page content addresses the following points:'':“2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique(…) 4.The person’s work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums”

Williamson began to implement a new technique, airbrushing directly on photography, bringing him into contact with Daniela Morera, who featured his photo work in Andy Warhol’s Interview Magazine.[4][5] The magazine’s lighting designer Jules Fisher introduced Richie Williamson and Dean Janoff to Studio 54 co-owners Ian Schrager and Steve Rubell, who invited them to create the sets and visuals for Studio 54. This led Williamson to create the Moon and Spoon symbol that eventually become a lasting icon of the Disco era.[6]
 * -Williamson’s technique of airbrushing directly on photography gained his notability supported by Reference 5. "Stephen Burrows e Daniela Morera - Vogue.it" (in Italian). Retrieved 2018-09-23. Italian Vogue.
 * -Williamson's creation of the Moon and Spoon symbol addresses the requirement of significant and substantial work, supported by References 1, 8, and 10.
 * 1. Gleiberman, Owen (2018-01-23). "Film Review: 'Studio 54'". Variety. Ret. 2018-09-19.
 * 8. "Studio 54 Radio - Ultimate Classic Dance". SiriusXM. October 13, 2013.
 * 10. Schrager, Ian; Goldberger, Paul; Colacello, Bob (2017). Studio 54. ISBN 978-0847843442.

Rachelkauffman (talk) Rachel Kauffman 20:19, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your feedback. I reviewed the Wikipedia guidelines, specifically the section titled, "Notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time". I found Richie Williamson to be a particularly notable candidate for a Wikipedia page due to his consistent and verifiable presence throughout a historic time (1970s - 1990s) for the growing and expanding art scene in the Culture of New York City.
 * -- Rachelkauffman (talk} Rachel Kauffman 03:46, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your additional feedback. I am hoping to engage in a discussion regarding the categorization of this page. I am seeking to move the page from AfD into remedial action to further strengthen the content so it can adequately contribute to the global Wikipedia knowledge base.
 * TimTempleton (talk) As a new Wikipedia user, my understanding of the overarching goal of the open content encyclopedia is to create continuity and historical narrative where gaps in recorded knowledge exist. Wikipedia aggregates data from across the comprehensive network of contributors and recorded sources to create verifiable narrative regarding information worthy of unbiased documentation. A Google search not rendering results outside of Wikipedia is not a rigorous Litmus Test as to WP:GNG in scenarios where reliable information has not already been made readily available via an online search.
 * DGG (talk) please see other verifiable references utilized in addition to the NYT (including but not limited to):
 * Reference 5: An article published in Italian Vogue with work published by Richie Williamson and quotations about Williamson’s contribution to Studio 54. (https://www.vogue.it/people-are-talking-about/vogue-arts/2013/03/morera-burrows#ad-image261634)
 * Reference 6: Richie Williamson’s published work in the book: Life and Death on the New York Dance Floor, 1980-1983 by Tim Lawrence. (https://www.worldcat.org/title/life-and-death-on-the-new-york-dance-floor-1980-1983/oclc/932385980)
 * I recently became aware of Williamson’s work in the context of his contributions and relevance to the New York City art scene in the 1970s – 1990s. It is important to indicate that sources regarding his more recent work are not heavily sourced, as there is no bias or alternative reason for posting this page, other than to represent a missing piece of historical narrative within Wikipedia. RedditAddict69 (talk), please advise on your current status to recuse yourself from nominating AfDs due to school as mentioned on your talkspace. I am concerned that based on this information you may not have had time to comprehensively review all available sources.
 * I am seeking assistance with contribution of additional sources as per Wikipedia Policy “the best practice is to improve it if you can rather than deleting salvageable text”. I chose to create my first Wikipedia article in the interest of contributing to the important landscape of collaborative encyclopedic knowledge. Thank you for your attention to my contribution.
 * -- Rachelkauffman (talk} Rachel Kauffman 06:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)


 * So he's mentioned in various places and has popped up in various places. That doesn't constitute notability. Delete. -- Hoary (talk) 01:14, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - insufficient sourcing. I see a few passing mentions by name but no indepth coverage. One of my personal litmus tests is whether his early life can be properly sourced, and a targeted Google search (adding Arkansas, Texas, etc. to his name for the search string) turns up nothing that can be used. Fails WP:GNG. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  21:37, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. The NYT reference is a mention in a long article about current art shows. Almost all the articles is devoted to the ones that are by actually notable artists. It's not a substantial source for him, and there's nothing better.  DGG ( talk ) 22:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete – Yes, mentioned in NYT, but not enough of a mention to be sufficient for GNG. Other articles are promo/also passing mentions/insufficient. Redditaddict69 (talk) (contribs)  23:46, 3 October 2018 (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.