Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Gericke: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 14: Line 14:
* '''Keep''' I understand exactly what you are saying. But I think the projects might be notable in themselves. See this [http://www.nytimes.com/1998/10/08/garden/currents-transportation-at-last-a-logo-that-communicates.html NYT article] on the logo he did for Air Trans, for example. Doing logos for FIFA, Air Trans, 1LPC and the like is notable work. Millions see that kind of work. This is the guy you call when you need a graphic designer for the [[Rainbow Room]], as demonstrated [http://www.pentagram.com/#/blog/118603 here]. He appears to be a heavy hitter in the graphic design world. I see a number of museum collections as well on the list. Sorry but I think I just answered my own question about the tipping point. For now, I will vote keep and watch this discussion with interest. (Regardless of the outcome, the page needs improvement.) [[User:New Media Theorist|New Media Theorist]] ([[User talk:New Media Theorist|talk]]) 04:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' I understand exactly what you are saying. But I think the projects might be notable in themselves. See this [http://www.nytimes.com/1998/10/08/garden/currents-transportation-at-last-a-logo-that-communicates.html NYT article] on the logo he did for Air Trans, for example. Doing logos for FIFA, Air Trans, 1LPC and the like is notable work. Millions see that kind of work. This is the guy you call when you need a graphic designer for the [[Rainbow Room]], as demonstrated [http://www.pentagram.com/#/blog/118603 here]. He appears to be a heavy hitter in the graphic design world. I see a number of museum collections as well on the list. Sorry but I think I just answered my own question about the tipping point. For now, I will vote keep and watch this discussion with interest. (Regardless of the outcome, the page needs improvement.) [[User:New Media Theorist|New Media Theorist]] ([[User talk:New Media Theorist|talk]]) 04:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
:PS: Ask a New Yorker if they know who the uber-well sourced WP:NOTABLE [[Ayah Bdeir]] is. Probably .02% do. Ask them if they have seen the Airtrain logo. Probably 80% have. Yes, it doesn't have his name on it, but he did do it, and it's a notable accomplishment. I guess I am arguing that massive public dissemination of an artist/designer's work might be grounds for WP:GNG. [[User:New Media Theorist|New Media Theorist]] ([[User talk:New Media Theorist|talk]]) 05:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
:PS: Ask a New Yorker if they know who the uber-well sourced WP:NOTABLE [[Ayah Bdeir]] is. Probably .02% do. Ask them if they have seen the Airtrain logo. Probably 80% have. Yes, it doesn't have his name on it, but he did do it, and it's a notable accomplishment. I guess I am arguing that massive public dissemination of an artist/designer's work might be grounds for WP:GNG. [[User:New Media Theorist|New Media Theorist]] ([[User talk:New Media Theorist|talk]]) 05:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
:*'''Reply''' If he has designed a truly notable logo, then we should have an article about the logo, not the non-notable designer. Name recognition among New Yorkers is not in any sense an indicator of notability here on Wikipedia. There is extensive coverage of Ayah Bdeir, therefore she is notable. This is a biography of Gericke. Wikipedia biographies ''must'' be based on significant coverage in reliable, independent sources ''of the person'', not of their well known or recognizable work. This is a well established point here on Wikipedia. Now, the ''New York Times'' and two or three other reliable sources could publish profiles of him ''as a person'' and then he would then be notable. But where is the significant coverage of him now? [[User:Cullen328|<b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328</sup>]] [[User talk:Cullen328|<span style="color:#00F">''Let's discuss it''</span>]] 05:20, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
:*'''Reply''' If he has designed a truly notable logo, then we should have an article about the logo, not the non-notable designer. Name recognition among New Yorkers is not in any sense an indicator of notability here on Wikipedia. There is extensive coverage of Ayah Bdeir, therefore she is notable. This is a biography of Gericke. Wikipedia biographies ''must'' be based on significant coverage in reliable, independent sources ''of the person'', not of their well known or recognizable work. This is a well established point here on Wikipedia. In the future, the ''New York Times'' and two or three other reliable sources could publish profiles of him ''as a person'' and then he would be notable. But where is the significant coverage of him now? [[User:Cullen328|<b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328</sup>]] [[User talk:Cullen328|<span style="color:#00F">''Let's discuss it''</span>]] 05:20, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:31, 6 September 2015

Michael Gericke (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)

I could find no real assertion of notability. This person is a graphic designer who is employed, and has created graphic designs for a number of companies. That's it, as far as I can tell. That describes every single graphic designer (except, well, unemployed ones.) I found no clue that he had ever done anything noteworthy.

There are a lot of references, and some work has clearly gone into the article, so I didn't want to speedy-tag the article in case I missed something. If I didn't, then it's probably a candidate for speedy deletion. Ashenai (talk) 03:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. New Media Theorist (talk) 03:50, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As a designer, the actual work he has done is high quality and very notable: e.g. One Laptop per Child. I wonder though, at what point does a designer cease being an employee and become a notable designer on their own? It happened for Massimo Vignelli, the designer of the NYC subway map and signage. But has it happened for this designer? not sure. New Media Theorist (talk) 03:58, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The answer to your question, New Media Theorist, is the reason this article should be deleted. Plenty of independent, reliable sources devote significant coverage to Vignelli. With this person, there are only passing mentions in reliable sources, and several of the sources do not discuss him at all. Company bios and university magazine blurbs about alumni do not confer notability. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:41, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I understand exactly what you are saying. But I think the projects might be notable in themselves. See this NYT article on the logo he did for Air Trans, for example. Doing logos for FIFA, Air Trans, 1LPC and the like is notable work. Millions see that kind of work. This is the guy you call when you need a graphic designer for the Rainbow Room, as demonstrated here. He appears to be a heavy hitter in the graphic design world. I see a number of museum collections as well on the list. Sorry but I think I just answered my own question about the tipping point. For now, I will vote keep and watch this discussion with interest. (Regardless of the outcome, the page needs improvement.) New Media Theorist (talk) 04:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Ask a New Yorker if they know who the uber-well sourced WP:NOTABLE Ayah Bdeir is. Probably .02% do. Ask them if they have seen the Airtrain logo. Probably 80% have. Yes, it doesn't have his name on it, but he did do it, and it's a notable accomplishment. I guess I am arguing that massive public dissemination of an artist/designer's work might be grounds for WP:GNG. New Media Theorist (talk) 05:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply If he has designed a truly notable logo, then we should have an article about the logo, not the non-notable designer. Name recognition among New Yorkers is not in any sense an indicator of notability here on Wikipedia. There is extensive coverage of Ayah Bdeir, therefore she is notable. This is a biography of Gericke. Wikipedia biographies must be based on significant coverage in reliable, independent sources of the person, not of their well known or recognizable work. This is a well established point here on Wikipedia. In the future, the New York Times and two or three other reliable sources could publish profiles of him as a person and then he would be notable. But where is the significant coverage of him now? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:20, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]