Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Independent Realists Exhibition


 * 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 redirect to Museum Møhlmann. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 22:12, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

The Independent Realists Exhibition

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Looks like promo, fails WP:GNG The Banner  talk 10:59, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  The Banner  talk 10:59, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete it is pure promotion, as the nomination says. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 13:40, 4 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment: This article is part of a series of three with Rob Møhlmann and Museum Møhlmann all describing another aspect of the artist his life and work. This article can easily be merged into one of the other two, if this is needed.
 * As to the sources, over the years the annual exhibition has been mentioned in half of the national daily newspapers such as Algemeen Dagblad, de Volkskrant, Nederlands Dagblad and Trouw, and on the websites and/or curriculum vitae's of over 200 hundred artist in the Netherlands most of them professional artists and listed as such at the Netherlands Institute for Art History databank rkd.nl.
 * Internationally this annual event seem to be known as the Independent Realists Exhibition and the article should be renamed as such. This could be done right now.
 * Back to the sources. There have been catalogs published of the 13th to the 18th edition of the festival, which gives plenty of information about this event.
 * Again, it seems to be the question of the English/American/International Wikipedia allows us to write about regional events with a national and some international impact. -- Mdd (talk) 15:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * What about independent sources? And sources that describe the event in-depth? Passing mentions are not very helpful. The Banner  talk 15:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I would be OK with a merge to Museum Møhlmann, given proper sourcing. As to catalogs of the shows, those are not independent do not contribute anything to notability. All three of these articles have a promotional feel to them. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:32, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, we can keeps this in mind. In the light of an earlier ongoing AfD discussion I like to bring forward first, that a literal interpretation of notability and fear of promotion has lead us to practically zero representation of the front of the art scene (of the Netherlands) here.
 * There are contemporary internationals, nation-wide, regional and local galleries and art events (and visual artists as well) which are often active for decades. They don't get through.... because it is promotional?? A large part of being an artist is to make promotion, and art events are all about it. Should this be boycotted because they are doing their job?
 * The thing is that there is the commercial promotion to sell products and services, and there is the art promotion to present and represent artists concepts and their points of views at the world. Selling the art works is only a small part of the art business.
 * Personally I think a smaller portion of the art world and artists should be allowed to represent itself here... and do what they are already doing. We should be aware that they work in our encyclopedic way, and we should be aware that we are not being flooded by articles about just local or regional events with little impact.


 * Beside a literal interpretation of the simplified rules of notability, we could start to image to give a comprehensive overview of the art world in a specific area. Now the thing is, that with this article I have the impression this is going in the right direction.
 * Now I added the Category:Art exhibitions in the Netherlands, and only now noticed this article has already been trimmed down for 75%. The category allows us to see what other art events are represented in the Netherlands and beyond.
 * We can then see that indeed... this is the first Dutch annual art event represented here..!! And before that.... 18 years of zero representation. I have a great deal of respect for the person, who started this and I hope we can do a better job together. -- Mdd (talk) 16:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Our notability rules do not work the way you suggest. People or events have to meet WP:GNG or a special notability guidelines like WP:ARTIST. a literal interpretation of the simplified rules of notability is exactly how it works here, as we have millions of pages to apply those guidelines to. If you want a broader discussion of notability, head over to WP:villagepump or the talk page of WP:NThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I will start this broader discussion of notability one day. I agree for now the current notability rules must applied. I also noticed there are similar articles here such as on the KunstRAI and the TEFAF, which gives us a lead to how this subject can be represented here in a for the subject more acceptable way. If this is here not possible, merger could be the solution. -- Mdd (talk) 19:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Independent sources haven't been proffered, so redirect to Museum Møhlmann. -- Hoary (talk) 23:51, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:53, 7 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment, the Dutch WP has an article on this with a bit more info (Hooray!), but its up for deletion with sources/coi concerns, see here (Drat!:)). Coolabahapple (talk) 07:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note I received a link on my talk page from User:Robert Paul Peters to have a look at something in regard to this article's deletion. The link was a "Constant Contact" item, i.e. an email tracker. Be careful when clicking on such links if you receive one.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 12:24, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * ThatMontrealIP, I sincerely doubt that this was intentionally. I noticed the link was to a news bulletin of the Art Renewal Center, which normally present itself at the artrenewal.org. Its seems this message was mirrored at the campaign.r20.constantcontact.com website. I guess User:Robert Paul Peters just wanted to draw your attention to the artrenewal.org/Blog/Month/201911. -- Mdd (talk) 13:36, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Well it is still a tracker. In any case the link is trivial coverage.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 13:45, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It is more an announcement of an exhibition than an in-depth source. The Banner  talk 14:52, 9 December 2019 (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.