Conor Collins: Does making art that gain media attention due to their provactive notions create sufficient notability?  No inbound links.  No awards.  No wider coverage that I can see.  Seaweed ( talk ) 18:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , Visual arts , Politics , Sexuality and gender ,  and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : More than enough good RS, 3, 4 and 6 are the first ones I pulled up and they're about this individual.  I suppose GNG is met, I'm unsure if they meet artistic notability, but they've been talked about enough by others, so that we can also include them here in wiki under general notability.  Call it a cultural oddity curiosity I suppose.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  I've looked through most of the sources that could be considered reliable, and none are significant coverage that I see.  The "Time" source, [6] for example, is just three sentences and an embedded instagram post.  Elspea756 ( talk ) 23:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : sources 3 and 4 are good, as is source 15 (a reminder that BuzzFeed News is different from BuzzFeed and is reliable).  Source 19 even describes the subject as "award-winnning".  Toadspike [Talk] 07:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] To respond to SportingFlyer below, I think it's clear that the GNG has been met.  For us to decide that people who get excessive media attention for provocative stunts need to meet some higher bar would require an RfC, or for someone to point me to some hidden policy/guideline I've never read.  The media is biased toward this stuff, and, for better or for worse, we rely on the media to source our articles and determine what's notable.  Toadspike [Talk] 11:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not sure, honestly.  There's lots of sources - too many, really - in the article talking about his art, because his art is provocative, but many of them are just links to self-promotion on social media.  The article needs a good cleanup, too.  I don't really see any critical coverage of him , though, that I would expect to see from an artist.  Don't really want to delete, but am leaning delete.  SportingFlyer T · C 19:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I must admit I'm a bit confused about biographical articles about artists sometimes.  I mean, if your life is about creating artworks, when do you become notable?  It's fine if that's your career and livelihood, but when does make you notable for an encyclopedia?  Where is the line?  I think it's also fair to say that a key feature of the artistic world is about awards, prizes, grants etc.  It's quite commonplace.  Therefore I do wonder sometimes if we give undue weight to artist who has this award or nominated for that award.  I'm also a bit concerned that too much weight is placed on media mentions to justify a Wikipedia article.  To be fair, I do find it hard work to read all the Wikipedia policies sometimes, but I suppose that's my problem.  In summary, I'm still not convinced that Conor Collins is notable enough for Wikipedia.  Failing that, it's definitely too detailed.  Seaweed ( talk ) 19:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, I don't see notability here either.  The notability guideline for artists is WP:ARTIST .  It is basically that there needs to be multiple reliable independent sources that devote significant coverage to the artist, or that the artist is widely cited by their peers, has been a significant part of a significant exhibition, their work is in the permanent collections of multiple major museums, things like that.  I am not seeing anything like that here, it's all just insignificant WP:ROUTINE coverage of minor run-of-the-mill events, like that "this drawing of a celebrity by a local artist got several thousand likes on twitter."  Elspea756 ( talk ) 20:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That's sort of my thinking as well.  Most articles include links back to his social media account, making it a question as to whether he's been truly independently noticed in my book.  It's clear he's getting noticed, but this may just be WP:TOOSOON .  SportingFlyer T · C 17:54, 27 May 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: no consensus