Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leah Golberstein (2nd nomination)

Leah Golberstein

[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)

Fails the specific notability criteria for academics and for creative people. I don't see where her gallery exhibits rise to the level of significance called for by WP:NARTIST. Further, limited coverage in independent sources. There is the Minnesota Public Radio piece, which is relatively in depth, but it's the only one cited. (The others are either her gallery or a university where she was part of an exhibition.) —C.Fred (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —C.Fred (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. —C.Fred (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. —C.Fred (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not meet the inclusion criteria for artists.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnpacklambert: could you revisit your !vote, based on the two collections as mentioned below?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I found some more sources, and two collections. Golberstein herself lists several collections at https://www.leahgolberstein.com/collections. I'd consider the Walker and the MIA significant, which means the subject meets the requirements of WP:NARTIST. There are more sources that I haven't added yet. Vexations (talk) 22:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Article needs vast improvement, however based on the collections that @Vexations: found, the subject meets WP:NARTIST criteria by way of having work in several notable permanent collections, the Minneapolis Museum on Art and the Walker Art Center. Article should be kept and improved. Netherzone (talk) 23:07, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep two collections = meets WP:ARTIST.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:ARTIST 4(d). —David Eppstein (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:ARTIST and sources User:Vexations found --Kiraface (talk) 02:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 02:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - consensus has been that if an artist has works in at least two public museums or galleries, the artist is notable. In this case, her work in in the Walker Art Center, a world-class art museum, and four other museums. If this must be deleted, we need to have much more of a discussion before we can change consensus. Bearian (talk) 13:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:ARTIST.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:23, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:CREATIVE. Borgia Venedict (talk) 13:54, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]