Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Neen art

Added comments 1
(These comments were added by 76.171.177.62 to the deletion discussion page after the debate was closed. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 20:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC) )

KEEP
 * neen should absolutely have a Wikipedia page. I should announce up front that I'm a neen fellow-traveller, having been part of the launch event at Gagosian Gallery in New York years ago (along with Steven Pinker and a few others).
 * neen itself was never a hoax, it was conscious effort ot come up with a name for a strain of contemporary art (just as critics named cubism, and the artists themselves named dada).
 * Miltos Manetas is a respected artist, having shown around the world, and the neensters and neenstars, while younger, are also starting to make names for themselves.
 * In addition to the NY Times, Salon, etc. there are numerous catalog articles and essays, most off-line, but reputable to art critics and art historians.
 * This page probably needs to be rewritten and perhaps toned down, but neen is a substantial enough work of conceptual art practice and interesting enough group of artists to retain on Wikipedia.

Added comments 2

 * nonsense and even if you read it carefully, it does not provide any context Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * your arguments are full of empathy and they are totally ignorant of contemporary art history to begin with. I also don't understand where do you find this energy, You consider Neen nothing of importance, and since last week it seems you have spent tens of hours, writing, editing, deleting, fighting,,criticizing whatever is related with it. I am writing below my ideas. Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * non-notable artists, not even if we consider neen notable Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * check the bios of each one of the artists and you will see quite few of them have participated in notable Biennials and respected art foundations mainly in Europe, there are tens of articles written for each one of them. All over the world. Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * they are writing their own bios on wikipedia (users Angeloplessas, Angelo Plessas, Dona tracy, etc; articles Angelo Plessas, Larry Carlson) Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Who doesn't??...look on some contemporary artists, shall I drop you some names. It is so unfair the way you criticize it. BTW I am not Larry Carlsson or Angelo Plessas. Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * far from encyclopedic, despite those sources; the article does not reflect anything from them, so please don't say "But there are sourceeeeeees..." Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * neen is based on a hoax Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Neen has started as a name project on big and lavish presentation at Gagosian Gallery,NYC Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * neen is basically a buzzword with no meaningful art behind it, it is "a still undefined generation of visual artists" Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Neen a simulated "art movement" with one of it's main forms of expression, websites. Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * neen, according to the article, "uses or abuses technology", it is a good magical thingy that use computer screens and domains and such, produces art that is "transformative and magical" Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You can simply describe Neen in 4 words as computer related abstract poetry, it is a new way at looking at things on screen, either you call it a poorly flash web animation or an elaborate virtual building. Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * neen is, according to Wired, a collection of animations and screenshots stolen from video games Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wrong, a total misinformation, I am not sure if this is exactly what's written, also dont forget that the article was written few years ago, since there are tens of articles with a more in-depth view Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * neen is, according to Salon, a virtual exhibition - we got TONS of those on the net, with better quality works! Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * who are you that you consider what is quality or not? I think your article on Wikipedia on LegendaryFrog / Joseph Blanchette is the most boring piece I have read on Wikipedia. Do you call this quality? Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * neen is, in reality, a bunch of poorly made flash animations. Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Check the following. Are these poor flash animations? http://www.fataltotheflesh.com/ http://www.papertoilet.com/ http://www.thetasteoftears.com/ http://www.elasticenthusiastic.com/ Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * neen basically consist of some men with an enormous appetite for attention (autobio, anyone?); Wikipedia is not the place to achieve this Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia stands for self-expression and respect. Your attitude is totally the opposite. Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * neensters are speaking bold about open source and filesharing, but they arguing over "stolen techniques" Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems that you have not read as much. Neensters are pro file-sharing and they like a lot to copy. They work on internet-"readymades" as much on their own stuff Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * If the article on LegendaryFrog / Joseph Blanchette was deleted because the media doesn't give a shit about him, despite the >20 million views of his works and his influence on the flash scene, then THIS ARTICLE MUST DEFINITELY GO. Frigo 08:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * On the contrary I think the LegendaryFrog / Joseph Blanchette is a total bore and I think this will have to go too if Neen is not on Wikipedia Dona Tracy 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Added Comments 3
Frigo you are a total maniac. It is really funny how you delete everything that is pro-Neen, your energy really is very surprising! There must be a personal reason for all this hate in Neen. Anyway I will ask your account deletion because you are a real Wiki vandal, you hide and delete information,you present information in a total biased way. Dona Tracy 09:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That will be a little hard for you to do so, after you have vandalised AfD discussion(s) at least three times Frigo 13:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)