Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aliza Shvarts (2nd nomination)
to Yale student abortion art controversy, for reasons already discussed to death at Talk:Yale student abortion art controversy|its talk page. Source review: If you remove the "Exhibitions and publications" section, which appears to be based entirely on affiliated and primary source refs that compose half of the bibliography's bulk, what remaining sources discuss the artist's oeuvre/career as |independent from the affair (and suggested retarget)? For those playing along, those are the refs on the two remaining paragraphs of the "Career" section. Well, Schotzko almost exclusively recounts the 2008 media response (see my summary on the aforementioned "discussed to death"), the small art mag Out of Order ref is http://web.archive.org/web/20180527155403/https://alizashvarts.com/ewExternalFiles/AlizaShvarts%20.pdf an interview that provides next to nothing we can paraphrase for an encyclopedia article, which leaves a short paragraph on her 2012/ongoing performance http://web.archive.org/web/20171113195445/http://lilith.org:80/blog/2017/04/how-rape-survivors-are-using-art/ in Lilith. The rest are either excerpts from the recent https://web.archive.org/web/20180610170739/https://artspacenewhaven.org/exhibitions/aliza-shvarts-off-scene/ Artspace show's http://web.archive.org/web/20180610151732/https://alizashvarts.com/ewExternalFiles/Off%20Scene.pdf catalog or primary/affilated sources. Anything we can pull from these would be |out-of-place in the existing article about the 2008 event, hence the redirect instead of merge. We standardly build articles in Wikipedia:Summary style|summary style: If and when the artist begins to receive profile/feature pieces from Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources|reliable, secondary sources, we can expand and possibly split from the existing article, but until then, the subject of the extant coverage is plainly the media circus (events/affair/controversy) ''surrounding'' the 2008 piece, not the artist's extended oeuvre, biography, or the actual 2008 never-shown performance itself, about any of which our reliable sources say little. {{talkquote|i=y|''Non-consensual Collaborations'' (2012–ongoing), in which the artist "retroactively designates events and interactions not initially conceived as part of an artistic project as art"}} I'm not sure what there would be to gain from declaring this discussion—extremely minor in the annals of Wikipedia—part of an artistic project, but for posterity, we certainly didn't consent to an artistic collaboration here either. Had this discussion not been so prominently advertised, I would have much rather spent this time building biographies on underserved artists about whom we already have an overabundance of Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources|reliable, secondary sourcing but just no article. Such sourcing determines whether we are able to do justice to an encyclopedic summary without deviating into primary source |original research, the latter being antithetical to Wikipedia. (not Help:Watchlist|watching, please {{tl|ping}} as needed
— [[User talk:Czar|czar]], 17:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:42||WP:COATRACK||WP:OR||WP:42 (Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything)