Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madonna of Laroque
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. There is a consensus that the sources, as uncovered during the progress of the AfD, constitute significant coverage to warrant the retention of the article. Mkativerata (talk) 00:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Madonna of Laroque (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A painting that Might be notable depending on whether or not it is by Leonardo Davinci got a few its in Gnews but overall seems non notable Weaponbb7 (talk) 05:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep. I think the the debate about whether it is by da Vinci or not is what makes it notable. Jenks24 (talk) 15:18, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Interesting and expandable topic. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 18:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I found it interesting to and Got two hits for RS and looked and could not find any elsewhere Weaponbb7 (talk) 18:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I added link to an article in The Telegraph, and another (originally published by Getty Images). --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 19:04, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Exactly two sources that say it might be Davinci painting two years ago are not enough, the other two citations appear to be unpublished works. Weaponbb7 (talk) 19:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I added link to an article in The Telegraph, and another (originally published by Getty Images). --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 19:04, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I found it interesting to and Got two hits for RS and looked and could not find any elsewhere Weaponbb7 (talk) 18:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete If there were a notable controversy about Madonna of Laroque being attributed to DaVinci it should first be mentioned in the Leonardo Da Vinci or List_of_paintings_by_Leonardo_da_Vinci article, then move to its own article when enough RS arise. I don't see that happening in this case. - LuckyLouie (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep There are two English hits including the Telegraph. There appear to be more substantial sources in French which should be investigated. freshacconci talktalk 02:33, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. More reliable sources can be found by a Google News search for the French name such as this one from The Times. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:24, 6 August 2010 (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.