Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Marx Lounge Alfredo Jaar

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. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 22:47, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Marx Lounge Alfredo Jaar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of importance, WP:CCOS. Fails WP:GNG. Was previously up at PROD but the tag was removed and no reason was left as why. --Anarchyte 00:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:49, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:49, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I'm finding some evidence that there should be coverage somewhere since it was mentioned in this book, but so far I'm leaning towards a redirect to the author. It looks like it wasn't just at one museum but at least two, from what I can see. It looks like it was somewhat of a traveling exhibit. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I also moved it back to its original name. I'm not sure why the original editor moved it to the other name since there were no other articles by that name. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:55, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm finding it hard to pin down when this was first shown. So far the earliest has been at the Liverpool Biennial in 2010. I don't think that we have an exact policy on artwork specifically, but this appears to have been a major exhibit at several notable events/places or part of a major exhibition. I'm leaning more towards keeping this one. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Yep, this link says that it was at the Biennial first before it went to Amsterdam. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:07, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It took some serious digging, but I finally found coverage for this art piece. It looks like it was shown at multiple locations as an integral part of a major art exhibition or on its own. I found quite a bit of coverage for this in Spanish language newspapers. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:14, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:13, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:13, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:14, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – More delsorts added per significant changes to the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:17, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into Alfredo Jaar. No notable enough to stand alone. Sources describe it.. but do not indicate exactly why the exposition is highly notable. Sietecolores (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The articles on this piece aren't just routine mentions - this piece has received quite a bit of coverage. In the Culture24 link Jaar talks about the piece and in Diario de Sevilla the article's writer actually gives their opinion on the work. If they were just offhand mentioning it that'd be one thing, but their commentary turns the article into a review of sorts for the installation. (IE, they say that it was a fairly timely piece, that it would be thought provoking, and that it'd open up debate.) Many of the other news articles do the same thing for the most part. What also pushed this for me is that this was a pretty central piece whenever it was shown, which is something that would be considered a sign of notability for artworks as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:47, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This artwork doesn't seem notable to me but the solid references in the article prove me wrong. A strong keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:05, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.