Deletion of Gabriela Trzebinski

Comment: I have reread the Peterson article and I think it raises an interesting question. It is obvious that as a declared collector of her works he is in a COI position. It is equally obvious that he takes a strongly positive POV. Yet his arguments are a credible interpretation of the work. If we ''consider'' that article, I would agree that the guidelines of  are fulfilled. If we ''discount'' that article, then, despite the many references that Ty has discovered, I tend with Drawn Some that the coverage is thin and does not reflect a notable appreciation of the contents and qualities of her work. Since I ''myself'' agree in part with Peterson, I could invoke the core of  - simply: "worthy of notice". But not based on a , rather based on a gut feeling (call that POV, or call it OR, or just the bias that is unavoidable in any case, simply because we care enough to edit). I'm thinking out loud here, but I don't yet see a clear (and equitable) line for this AfD
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: I see many trivial mentions, many of them obliquely in the context of family, and several gallery exhibitions but I still don't see the information verified and there is at least one untruth in the article. Many trivial mentions don't equal in-depth coverage and being shown in galleries and even museums is not the same as being in the permanent collection.  Fails  and  and contains false information
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: I have put the references on Talk:Gabriela Trzebinski.  They date from 1995 with exhibitions and coverage in US and UK.  Cumulatively they satisfy  and provide plenty of material to write an article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: I believe there is just enough information to qualify under otability|creative to at least have a stub, as shown here http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Gabriela+Trzebinski%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=a.  I’ll go through and clean-up the fluff.  Thanks
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: The artist is the subject of an extensive review on Artcritical (which is a good enough source for other articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecily_Brown, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_Bloom).  If some outside sources could be found to verify her background and basic facts about her, it would be a much better article, but as it is, I think it's decent enough to be called a stub.  While failing strict interpretation of , I think this one is close enough to the edge to warrant leaving it alone, though barely
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ARTIST)