Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Candid Camera (Australian photographic exhibition)
Common practice and notability are not even remotely the same thing, but LibStar tries to link the two. The only relevant question is notability. The gallery in question is undoubtedly one of the most important in Australia, and the exhibition was an enquiry into the Australian nation's social history via a 30-year retrospective of work by noted social documentary photographers such as Max Dupain and David Moore (photographer). True, galleries hold exhibitions all the time, but nationally important art galleries don't hold exhibitions as significant as this one all the time. According to , LibStar has a duty to investigate the article history and the subject before nominating it for deletion and, as part of that, make a 'good-faith attempt to confirm that such sources don't exist'. But the reality is that LibStar hasn't even properly read the article, which includes a link to an 850 word review in the leading daily newspaper published in one of Australia's state capitals (Australia only has one truly national general interest daily newspaper). Though the links aren't yet attached, there is plenty of other coverage, including a http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/05/28/2912657.htm?site=adelaide television interview of a participating photographer that was carried by the Australian national broadcaster. The link to that was recently pasted in another of LibStar's AfDs, as part of the refutation by another user and in part of the discussion that LibStar explicitly responded to, and LibStar should therefore be well aware of it. Again, LibStar seems to be deliberately ignoring evidence rather than trying to find it so that the article can be strengthened. The call for deletion is unwarranted.  —Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
— User:BlueThird, 02:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)