Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statue of Christopher Columbus (New London, Connecticut)


 * 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. Nominator has Withdrawn the AfD (non-admin closure) ~ Amkgp  💬  02:08, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Statue of Christopher Columbus (New London, Connecticut)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

These statues don't seem to have any real significance or notability other than recent decisions to remove them. I can't find any other significant discussion of them (ie as artistic pieces, tourist sites, etc) that indicates any need for separate articles. I'm not opposed to redirects either to List of monuments and memorials removed during the George Floyd protests or List of monuments and memorials to Christopher Columbus, which already contain all of the information in these two-sentence stubs. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Withdrawing: Upon further reflection, the sources added by Another Believer and ThatMontrealIP are enough to establish plausible notability. Certainly the articles are all now different enough that a bulk AfD makes no sense. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:30, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep (New London). First, it's not fair to group these together as it dilutes and confuses the AfD. Setting aside current events, these statues have history and sources are easily found. I have added two book sources (with pictures of the unveiling of the New London statue) and several other sources. I think the best thing to do here is withdraw this group nomination and resubmit them individually, if so desired.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:16, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep (Hartford). Same story here: added four sources. It's starting to be clear that this nomination did not involve WP:BEFORE. These are 90 year old statues, there is coverage.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, run-of-the-mill coverage of installation is available, as it is for any public statue. Yes, I noted that when doing BEFORE. Such coverage explicitly does not prove notability, and I repeat that I can't find any other significant discussion of them (ie as artistic pieces, tourist sites, etc) that indicates any need for separate articles. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well you missed this two-page section of a book for the New London statue, with four pictures of the unveiling and SIGCOV text.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:13, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep all per GNG (disclaimer: article creator). I'm not sure I'm willing to drop what I'm doing to rescue all of these pages, but there's almost certainly coverage for each of these, based on my experience working on many articles about public art and sculpture. I also agree, these should not have been nominated together. Are we really supposed to start collecting a list of sources here to show all 5 are notable? Also, more than just 'Googling' is required; I've promoted at least a dozen public artwork articles to Good status and always found newspaper archives most helpful. If the nominator has not searched in local library archives, regional art museums, etc, then IMO the nomination is premature. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, could WikiProjects Public Art and Sculpture be notified as well? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:12, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I chose the most appropriate deletion list pages I could find. There are not deletion list pages for public art or for sculpture. You are welcome to notify those Wikiprojects. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep (Middleton) I added about five or six sources here. This one is not as strong of a keep as the two above, as it was only installed in 1996. However it was the subject of a fascinating run of vandalism that was widely covered in RS. Added to article.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep (New Haven) Eight sources added. Other arguments for keeping are as above.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:42, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep (Norwalk) the coverage on this is fairly recent. I do believe there would be lots of coverage in a newspaper search or similar, but all I have access to at the moment is the recent coverage. This one was initially installed at a school, them moved to the city's "heritage Wall", so it may have less of storied history than, say, New Haven's. Three sources added.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:57, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 00:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Enough sources for concluding that the subject is notable for more than one event. desmay (talk) 04:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Keep all of them.  scope_creep Talk  11:25, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Nominator withdrew above (at top). 24.151.50.175 (talk) 19:08, 3 July 2020 (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.