Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mistigris: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:45, 28 November 2022

Mistigris

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article was nominated for deletion (as part of a group of articles) on July 28, 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep. When reviewing the deletion discussion some of the parties had conflicts regarding this article. I would suggest that the topic was never notable, that the entry is a fan essay, the topic has no coverage from 2006. The website listed seems to be active (I am removing a section which links to zipfiles) I would also ask if this article would meet today's article standards? Flibbertigibbets (talk) 01:47, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Findings;

Link https://paleotronic.com/2019/10/16/back-from-the-dead-the-life-death-and-resurrection-of-computer-art-group-mistigris/

Small blurb;

https://www.mobygames.com/company/mistigris Flibbertigibbets (talk) 02:00, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps List https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_artscene_groups

The paleotronic.com source is not significant. And rest are just passing mentions. Roost^T_C(please ping me when replying) 02:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete SOS Mistigris is a thing in France, as are most hits on this name. Not sure what this collective is supposed to be, the article has no inline references and it seems pointless trying to find any if the aticle's been this bad since 2006. Just delete it. They can recreate it using proper formatting and refs and what have you. These unsourced articles from the early wiki days still haunt us. Oaktree b (talk) 03:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Most hits" in what, Google? Notability should not be a function of SEO. People need to be looking into websites that cover an art scene to determine notability within the scene, unless you are arguing that that scene as a whole is not notable enough to have articles on individual artists/collectives - in which case the discussion scope should be bigger than one group's article. HunterZ (talk) 21:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, friends. Greetings from the Mistigris founder and chief administrator. We enjoy the feather in our cap that a Wikipedia article confers upon our organization, but I see despite our longevity our article is again on uncertain footing. If there are specific issues with the article I'd love to help fix them; if instead the contention is that we are inadequately notable then, alas, I'm not sure anything can be done for us. Tens of thousands of artworks exhibited by hundreds of artists for nearly 30 years... all these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. I could point to references to us in video documentaries but if you want print acknowledgements we're likely out of luck. Let me know! Pseudo Intellectual (talk) 19:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Artistic contributor to the Mistigris art collection here to confirm it's a real thing. Please inform what is needed to update the article. Please also note that much of the demoscene is not covered in text articles which are easily accessible outside of zip files, bbs boards and demoscene websites. I hope you do not apply this metric to other scener groups - the scene relies on things like Wikipedia for historical documentation. Polyducks (talk) 20:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find significant coverage by any independent reliable sources to support notability. (Note: this afd came to my notice via twitter.) Schazjmd (talk) 21:11, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep They are currently both the featured group on https://16colo.rs and have multiple entries on the front page, so I really don't understand picking on this particular group's article. If you're going to delete this, then the whole category of scene groups that each have their own article ought to get collapsed into a shared article that mentions them all. HunterZ (talk) 21:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 ::The [[paleotronic.com]] source is not significant. And rest are just passing mentions. [[User:Roost|<b>Roost</b>]][[User talk:Roost|<sup>T</sup>]]<sub>[[special:Contribs/Roost|C]]</sub><small>(please '''[[WP:PING|ping]]''' me when replying)</small> 02:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' SOS Mistigris is a thing in France, as are most hits on this name. Not sure what this collective is supposed to be, the article has no inline references and it seems pointless trying to find any if the aticle's been this bad since 2006. Just delete it. They can recreate it using proper formatting and refs and what have you. These unsourced articles from the early wiki days still haunt us. [[User:Oaktree b|Oaktree b]] ([[User talk:Oaktree b|talk]]) 03:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
+*:"Most hits" in what, Google? Notability should not be a function of SEO. People need to be looking into websites that cover an art scene to determine notability within the scene, unless you are arguing that that scene as a whole is not notable enough to have articles on individual artists/collectives - in which case the discussion scope should be bigger than one group's article. [[User:HunterZ|HunterZ]] ([[User talk:HunterZ|talk]]) 21:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 Hey, friends.  Greetings from the Mistigris founder and chief administrator.  We enjoy the feather in our cap that a Wikipedia article confers upon our organization, but I see despite our longevity our article is again on uncertain footing.  If there are specific issues with the article I'd love to help fix them; if instead the contention is that we are inadequately notable then, alas, I'm not sure anything can be done for us.  Tens of thousands of artworks exhibited by hundreds of artists for nearly 30 years... all these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.  I could point to references to us in video documentaries but if you want print acknowledgements we're likely out of luck.  Let me know! [[User:Pseudo Intellectual|Pseudo Intellectual]] ([[User talk:Pseudo Intellectual|talk]]) 19:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)