Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hunter's Home
to Henry Voordecker, or Henri Voordecker if that is more prevalent (formerly Delete) Agree with {{u|Cullen328}} that this is not a notable painting; I actually happen to like it, but that fact is just as irrelevant as the fact that many of you don't. Half of the already-short article is ed with the information about Voordecker rather than the artwork itself (cf. ''The Night Watch'', one of the truly notable pieces at the Rijksmuseum); in my opinion this is a pretty strong indication of the lack of depth of coverage. I would also oppose renaming this article to Voordecker, as I can find no evidence that the artist is notable either. The work does hang in one of the great museums of the world, this is true; but as someone who has spent some time at that museum, I would hardly that expect every one of the thousands of works I saw there, let alone {{tq|their total collection of 1 million objects}}, would have its own article. They are all significant enough to be displayed there, but the overwhelming majority of them are not notable enough to be sufficiently covered in independent, reliable secondary sources to even warrant a mention on the Rijksmuseum page, let alone have their own article. I would absolutely welcome a discussion on specific notability criteria for works of art, but I am fairly certain that this particular one wouldn't meet them
— User:Cthomas3, 03:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:COATRACK (Wikipedia:Coatrack articles)