Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Charvériat


 * 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 Island6. There is a COI investigation going on, which may affect things in the future, but for now, the consensus here is to redirect. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:24, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Charvériat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article on an artist and curator based in Shanghai. I had tagged it for notability and its use of dozens of inline external links. Another user kindly converted the links into references, but on closer examination the vast majority of 100 new references now point to sites that appear to be controlled by the article subject, according to whois searches. My hunch is that the notability is not there once you remove these unpublished sources. However I might be wrong, and the plethora of self-published sources supporting the article might be obscuring genuine sources. Bringing it here for wider discussion. New Media Theorist (talk) 22:56, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. New Media Theorist (talk) 23:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. New Media Theorist (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. New Media Theorist (talk) 23:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. The unpublished sources have now been removed. The current sources support the notability of the artist and curator. Charvériat is one of the major players on the international contemporary art scene, both as artist and curator. Coldcreation (talk) 07:01, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * He is? I'll admit that I know little about this (or any other) "scene"; but whether X is lemonde.fr, theguardian.com or nytimes.com, asking Google for "Thomas Charvériat" site:X brings me a total of zero hits. -- Hoary (talk) 05:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Good point Hoary. Searches for major players on the contemporary art scene generally |+%22louise+bourgeois%22+nytimes.com turn up hits.New Media Theorist (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep Redirect Significant coverage specifically about the individual is pretty thin, although I did find this. Also open to the possibility of a selective merge/redirect to Island6. Coverage in more established WP:RS mentions him in the context of this org. Vrac (talk) 15:53, 13 September 2015 (UTC) Changing to redirect to Island6. Vrac (talk) 18:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply Vrac, I think Merge or redirect is a pretty good idea actually, since, as you say, Charvariat is pretty much always mentioned in the context of Island6. My issue with this article, and also the Island6 and Liu Dao articles, is that they were obviously created and edited for WP:promotion purposes. I say that because the accounts Island6 (contribs), and Tc262 (contribs) are single-purpose accounts associated with editing these pages. These accounts have contributed literally hundreds of external links to external sites on Island6 and Liu Dao controlled by Thomas Charvériat. It's hard to see the real notability when there are so many externals and so few genuine refs. When you do a search for these organizations and people, they are about 20% as notable as the articles make them out to be. Liu Dao, as you point out, has decent references. Thomas Charvériat, does not meet does not meet [WP:ARTIST]], but I think the refs that exist are appropriate to include him in a paragraph or two of the Island6 article, so I would support redirect or merge.New Media Theorist (talk) 17:54, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean, there is a lot of content in relation to coverage. Doesn't seem to be much question about COI/SPA involvement either.  Maybe that merger proposal on Liu Dao could be resuscitated and a general pruning/rationalization done.  what do you make of all this? Vrac (talk) 20:06, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Coldcreation seems to be very knowledgeable on the subject. If you know the subject, and have done business with them in the past, how is that not a conflict? I find that talk page exchange to be emblematic of the problem with this article: you have to shave a lot of icing off the cake to find the real flavour.New Media Theorist (talk) 20:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I know nothing about Liu Dao and have not read the article. But I did read somewhere that Liu Dao and island6 are different entities (associated, or working in collaboration, and/or exhibiting at isalnad6). The only merger I would eventually consider is Thomas Charvériat with island6. But this is different than, for example, Léonce Rosenberg, the article about whom includes his Galerie de L'Effort Moderne. Charvériat is a gallery owner and an artist in his own right, while Rosenberg was not. For this reason two different articles are justified. Coldcreation (talk) 20:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * As for the comment above by New Media Theorist: It is not conflict of interest because I have no stakes or anything else from which I stand to benefit. In addition, all I've done to the article is clean it up, by removing links and sources related to or controlled by the artist, in the hopes of improving the encyclopedic article. Nothing more, nothing less. The only thing I find emblematic of a problem is your insistence on non-notability. Coldcreation (talk) 20:39, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * it's hard to take what you say in good faith, as you have not been transparent from the beginning about your relationship to the article subject. There is a presumption of neutrality here. If you know him and have curated shows with him, you have had a close relationship with the article subject and are therefore not neutral. You should have disclosed this up front. As to notability, there's a good case to examine it as the sources are weak. New Media Theorist (talk) 20:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:COI is pretty clear about this. "Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial or other relationships" You are arguing here and in the article [Talk page] for the notability of the subject, but you have a WP:COI. New Media Theorist (talk) 21:18, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no WP:COI, as per above, and the article Talk page (hence, nothing to disclose other than what is in the article). Notability is evident from the artists accomplishments (see the sources in the article). Coldcreation (talk) 21:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

... and this: Jonas Hoffmann, Ivan Coste-Manière, Global Luxury Trends: Innovative Strategies for Emerging Markets, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, Chapter 7, Luxury and Arts in China, The island6 Case, by Camille Jaganathan, pp. 101-113, ISBN 1137287381. Coldcreation (talk) 08:36, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It would appear that the four points at WP:ARTIST are amply satisfied. Coldcreation (talk) 08:53, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Coldcreation, you are pretty good at arguing for your friends. As you admitted to curating him in several shows in the past, you have a neutrality probelm in this AfD, per WP:COI, and I am not sure why you are pushing this so hard. If you look for references supporting Charveriat's art career, there's basically nothing except self-promotion. There are lots of refs for his involvement as a promoter and part of Island6, and that is where this info should be merged.New Media Theorist (talk) 21:35, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok I didn't initially know about the prior history here... There is always WP:COIN for dealing with COI if people feel it is warranted... As for that book source, it strikes me as more evidence that a merge/redirect to Island6 makes sense. It contains a very brief bio that serves to introduce content about, and opinions given in the context of, Island6. Vrac (talk) 21:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Coldcreation if you can come up with three significant sources about Charveriat's work as an artist (reviews, interviews, significant book citations longer than a few sentences) that are not about his role in Island6, and are not self-published or minor mentions, I will happily withdraw the AfD. I tried, and it's impossible. He is not notable as an artist. His notability is all connected to Island6, and that is where he should be.New Media Theorist (talk) 21:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, I will argue in favor of any artist that I feel merits the denomination. In this case, a discussion at Talk:Thomas Charvériat prompted me, quite neutrally, to clean up the article. There was no dispute between editors on content. As soon as it was mentioned the launching of an AfD I noted my 'first hand' contact and vouched for the notability of the artist/curator. This problem should have been resolved at Talk, and by subsequent editing to improve the main article, per WP:DEL-CONTENT, with a Requests for comments, or a variety of other tags for further input. This AfD was posted prematurely.

Secondly, the publication Luxury and Arts in China was found in about 10 seconds with a cursory search. There are many other independent sources, in a wide variety of languages (e.g., Catalan, Spanish, French), referring to Charveriat's work as an artist (prior to the creation of island6), regardless of how many words or sentences are used.
 * 1. He is widely cited by peers or successors, especially in printed press, e.g., newspapers, between 2002 and 2006, of which I have copies.
 * 2. In many of those sources, he is mentioned for originating a significantly new concept and technique (with the use of touch-free motion sensing interactivity, LED, etc.).
 * 3. While in Spain, he created and played a major role in co-creating a significantly well-known body of work. These works were the subject of multiple independent periodical articles and reviews (mostly in Catalan or Spanish media).
 * 4. These works were a substantial part of significant museum, salon, cultural center and gallery exhibitions, for which he received considerable critical attention: All of the points above per WP:ARTIST. That you, New Media Theorist, find it "impossible" to locate published mentions of the artist reveals more about your multiple-language searching skills than notability.

Finally, and in conclusion, as mentioned above: while a merger of Thomas Charvériat and island6 is feasible, it is not recommendable, as Charvériat is an artist in his own right, i.e., he is notable as a result of his qualifications, abilities and artistic efforts, and for his association with others or with his gallery. If need be, I will add a list of independent sources (in whatever language) at Charvériat Talk (where this discussion should have transpired in the first place) so as not to be indiscriminately accused of conflicting interest. Coldcreation (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Let's see the sources that talk about his artwork. He does not show up in the searches as being notable for his art because he isn't. FYI, Jenny Holzer was using LED's in her artworks in 1989, and she was not the first. The same goes for touch sensing and interactivity, which date to the 1960's. Lastly, you are not neutral in this discussion, having curated him in four exhibitions at your gallery, as you admitted on the article talk page. Leave the Afd to those who have no involvement with the article subject.New Media Theorist (talk) 07:32, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment User :Coldcreation, you did not disclose your conflict transparently as you should have. You first tired to disclose it privately to me by email, and finally did when I refused to turn on the email. That's not good. New Media Theorist (talk) 07:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I will post reliable and verifiable independent sources at Talk:Thomas Charvériat, where this discussion should be taking place. The artist does show up in multiple-language searches as being notable for his art (particularly in Catalan, Spanish and French), contrary to your erroneous claim. Your second comment generates concern: as a self-proclaimed "new media theorist" (your username), you should know that an artist needs not invent a new technology, but use it in novel innovative ways. In multiple sources, Charvériat is mentioned for originating significantly new concepts and techniques, with the use of touch-free motion sensing interactivity, LED, etc., not for having invented the technology, or for having been the first to use it. Importance and originality may be placed on the concepts or intention upon which artwork is based, and/or realized, not solely upon the medium used to create it. [EDIT: Bill Viola didn't invent Video art, nor was he the first to use video, and yet...]. Secondly, your accusations of WP:COI have already been addressed and are becoming annoying. This is not the board for such matters. As for the notability of the artist: If need be, I will post a list of references at Charvériat Talk, which will include articles published in prominent periodicals, such as El Mundo, La Vanguardia, El Periódico, and Expansión (many of which may still be accessible on Internet), along with radio and television interviews on the topic of Charvériat and his art. Lastly, the incessant ventilation of your chimerical claim that the artist is not notable reflects both shortcomings in your ability to search the Web in languages other than English, your ability to locate archived material published on the Internet over the past decade or two, and your lack of knowledge with respect to the subject under review. Coldcreation (talk) 09:51, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I am familiar with these sources, and speak the three languages in question, but I don't see anything beyond passing mentions. Happy to be proven wrong. While I agree that most of this discussion could have taken place somewhere else, if you find decent sources it's best to post them here so that other editors can take them into consideration when they !vote. Vrac (talk) 12:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

The goal here is not to prove anyone wrong, but I will gladly post the sources both here and at the respective talk page, Talk:Thomas Charvériat. I will also take the liberty to boldly add some of these to the main page, Thomas Charvériat, even though several links are at the artists website, as many are scans of published documents and articles (such as from El País, Netart Review, Ocaña, etc.). Note that for the past few years, the artist has been signing his works under pseudonyms (or group name), so searching his name will not lead to all the articles on the topic of his artwork (for this reason most of the references listed date prior to the opening of Island6). Note too, many, if not all the independent sources presented here are in addition to the references already present on the artists main page, and that combined (give or take a few that may overlap), exemplify amply the notability of the artist. Finally, I have not yet delved into the Coldcreation Gallery archive (material dated between 2002-2007) to sifted through the large body of publications in periodicals, reviews, audio and video recordings that had not appeared on the Internet (or are no longer), within which Charvériat is ubiquitously present; bolstering further still his notability as an artist. Coldcreation (talk) 16:10, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Katherine Cennamo, John Ross, Peggy Ertmer, Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach, Cengage Learning, Jan 27, 2009, p. 459, ISBN 0495090476
 * Joan Carles Ambrojo, Un artista manipula a distancia aparatos electrónicos ajenos, El País, Spain
 * 50_easy, La Ultima Cena, Galeria La Santa, article, N. 19, 11/12/2003, Barcelona
 * 50_easy, 2 page article
 * Guerrilla-Innovation, What you buy is almost what you get, February 2005
 * Eric Fouchet, détournements, Influx / Port-Folio, pp. 34-35
 * Débora Gutiérrez A., Artista crea electrodomésticos que adquieren vida propia, Cienca y Salud, La Tercera, 24 September 2001
 * Thomas Charveriat, nogome.com
 * Three by Thomas Charveriat, Animatronic Installations, networked_performance, Turbulence.org archive, 9 January 2005
 * Finaliza el Festival de Investigación Artística, "El Observatori 2004 ha reunido en Valencia las muestras más vanguardistas de net-art, diseño gráfico y música", e-cultura, El Marcantil Valenciano, 10 October 2004, p. 32
 * The Machine Manifesto, Cultura en migración, Observatori 2004, 5è Festival Internacional de Investigación Artística de Valencia, 7-10 October 2004, Ciutat de les Arts i les Ciències (City of Arts and Sciences), Museu de les Ciències Príncipe Felipe, Valencia, Spain
 * The Return Policy Project, 10 January 2005
 * Project::Free 2 Talk?, Netart Review, 12 June 2005
 * Exposición Transhalucinogenetic, Foro Salud Mental, Ocio, arte y creatividad como herramienta rehabilitadora, Ciudadela de Pamplona del 3 al 19 de noviembre de 2005
 * Entropy, Chaos, Order and Emergence, Inmersion Sonora, FO A RM magazine of arts and research, autonomy issue, Radio Contrabanda (91.4 FM), 21 April 2005
 * Thomas Charveriat, Blue and Red Unconscious, Le Salon de Mont Rouge, 2004
 * Dessislava Pirinchieva, Relato China. Capítulo tres. Thomas Charvériat, Ocaña, 16 January 2015

 Comment I am disturbed that a folder of press articles suddenly appeared on Thomas Charvériat's site this morning, and that Coldcreation was able to find them and link to them so quickly. My confidence in the neutrality of Wikipedia is declining rapidly. Here's a listing of this morning's press folder on Charvériat's site. Care to comment, Coldcreation? Many of the references you cite were just posted this morning on Charvériat's site. How is that even possible?New Media Theorist (talk) 18:35, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

* http://m5project.com/Press_ThomasCharveriat/ [* DIR]	vidgirl's reviews/	15-Sep-2015 08:06 	-
 * [DIR]	Parent Directory	 	-
 * [IMG]	AsiaMagNo1Cover.jpg	15-Sep-2015 07:57 	192K
 * [IMG]	AsiaMagazinepagw1.jpg	15-Sep-2015 07:57 	203K
 * [DIR]	DiariDeBarcelona/	15-Sep-2015 07:59 	-
 * [DIR]	DiarioDeBarcelona/	15-Sep-2015 08:00 	-
 * [IMG]	ElPais(1).jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:17 	235K
 * [IMG]	F2T(Article_earplug).jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:00 	88K
 * [IMG]	FiftyEasy#19Article.jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:00 	55K
 * [IMG]	FiftyEasy#19Cover.jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:00 	34K
 * [IMG]	FiftyEasy.jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:18 	457K
 * [DIR]	Guerilla_innovation/	15-Sep-2015 08:00 	-
 * [IMG]	Influx(1).jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:18 	433K
 * [IMG]	Influx(2).jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:18 	290K
 * [IMG]	LaTercera.jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:18 	281K
 * [DIR]	Nogome_artcle(Portuguese)/	15-Sep-2015 08:04 	-
 * [DIR]	PinYPonDJS/	15-Sep-2015 08:04 	-
 * [IMG]	Pornawak(1).jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:18 	164K
 * [IMG]	Pornawak(2).jpg	15-Sep-2015 08:18 	221K
 * [DIR]	Turbulence_articles/	15-Sep-2015 08:05 	-
 * [DIR]	UbiksNet(japanese)/	15-Sep-2015 08:05 	-
 * [DIR]	WemakeArtNotMoney(article)/	15-Sep-2015 08:06 	-
 * [DIR]	blog_about_telephones/	15-Sep-2015 08:00 	-
 * [DIR]	mikelist/	15-Sep-2015 08:04 	-
 * [DIR]	netartreview.net/	15-Sep-2015 08:04 	-
 * [ ]	www_ocana_cat_2015_01_16_relato_china_capitulo_tres_thomas_c.pdf	15-Sep-2015 08:05 	1.4M

Comment: Your failure or refusal to "get the point", New Media Theorist, is beyond disconcerting. This board is not about the neutrality of Wikipedia. It is about an artist whose notability you questioned. You have been answered. ✅. Coldcreation (talk) 18:58, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Questioning the neutrality of a contributor in order to preserve WP:NPV is well within the Wikipedia guidelines. You still have not answered how you found those links so fast, the ones that were published this morning to Charvériat's site!New Media Theorist (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Disconcerting is an appropriate word for this situation, but not for New Media Theorist's behavior. They appear to have good reason to suspect a conflict of interest here. I also find it disconcerting that you would cite WP:DISRUPT instead of answering the question about the sources. Vrac (talk) 00:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: As you mention above Vrac, there is always WP:COIN for dealing with COI if people feel it is warranted. The citations, some found on the artist's website (mentioned above), others not, are simply more evidence for notability. WP:Artist is confirmed, WP:COI is irrelevant, and WP:NPV is conserved. Coldcreation (talk) 04:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The question as to how I found these citations so fast has little or no practical relevance: I have high-speed broadband Internet access. Regarding the question of when links were posted at Charvériat's website, I have no control over that, nor does it make any difference for the outcome of this discussion, as long as the sources are reliable and verifiable. Coldcreation (talk) 09:28, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, COIN it is. Here is a link to the case: Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Vrac (talk) 23:21, 16 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note to Closing Admin I have serious doubts about the neutrality of this discussion and some of the information presented here. New Media Theorist (talk) 21:57, 16 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Island6 as a collaborative artist, as per Vrac and New Media Theorist above. --Bejnar (talk) 00:34, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note to Closing Admin: The citations above represent fairly, proportionately and without bias, significant views, published by reliable sources on the topic. "The neutral point of view does not mean exclusion of certain points of view, but including all verifiable points of view which have sufficient due weight", per WP:YESPOV. While naturally having our own points of view, the goal is improving Wikipedia content in good faith. Finally, arguments have been given on both sides of this issue. The preponderance of evidence supports notability, and more particularly WP:Artist, i.e., the person who is the topic of a biographical article is worthy of notice, remarkable or significantly interesting enough for a written account of that person's life be recorded within Wikipedia. Coldcreation (talk) 21:27, 17 September 2015 (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.