Arch of Dignity, Equality, and Justice: Sources listed are either to SJSU, which houses the arch, or to writings of the artist who created it.  Additional sources found in WP:BEFORE search are also from SJSU or authored by artist Judy Baca.  It gets trivial coverage in a few places (passing reference in a local paper and local visitor guide) but no significant, secondary coverage in independent, reliable sources.  One AtD would be to merge any encyclopedic content to Paseo de César Chávez .  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 21:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and California .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I definitely agree that it's surprising that aren't more independent sources featuring the Arch.  That being said, I was able to find a few independent sources discussing the Arch, namely: - A publication from from the San Jose Museum of Art - here - An article from the Social and Public Art Resource Center - here - A feature on GPSmyCity - here - An article by Mosaic Atlas - here (Admittedly, Mosaic Atlas is partnered with SJSU, but ostensibly they're an independent source) Personally, I think the article should be kept , but adding the More citations needed template and incorporating the above sources.  SammySpartan ( talk ) 23:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I saw the SPARC piece during my search, but Judy Baca is a [ of SPARC ] and the author of the piece.  It can't be independent.  The GPSMyCity piece appears to be copied from an official SJSU page here .  And the final piece published by SJSU cannot be independent when establishing notability of a structure at SJSU.  With only the SJMoA piece you found, we still need more sources to get this over GNG or NBUILDING.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 01:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , per new sources above, and an artwork is usually kept if the housing institution, gallery, museum, etc., has catalogued it in some form.  This is a specific artwork, not a building, and already has enough to pass GNG related to Wikipedia visual arts pages.  As for its value to Wikipedia, please note the navboxes which now include it and the benefit of including this artwork within them (the page and this discussion inspired the creation of the {{ Dolores Huerta }} navbox, thanks Sammy Spartan and Dclemens1971).  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 09:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - the artwork is one of the few highly visible landmarks of the SJ public art scene.  It has sources on its artistry, historical relevance to Cesar Chavez, and local relevance to San Jose.  Cristiano Tomás ( talk ) 14:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  @ Cristiano Tomás I agree with you that it is a highly visible landmark.  @ Randy Kryn I'd also like to find a way to keep it.  But can you show any reliable, secondary, significant coverage that is independent of San Jose State University, the artist Judy Baca who made it, or of the organization she founded?  Those sources are what I can't turn up, and that's what is required under policy for GNG and SNGs related to art/buildings.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 14:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This isn't a building, so building notability wouldn't apply.  Visual art pages are usually accepted as established with sources from the holding museum or organization, in this case the University mentions would apply toward notability.  And wouldn't the University mentions be secondary (primary would be the work itself)?  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 14:41, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] There's no SNG for artworks, so it has to pass GNG, which requires independent sources.  Sources from the entity that commissioned the artwork (SJSU) and the artist who made it (Baca) cannot be independent from it for purposes of assessing notability.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 14:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] No SNG for artworks?  I thought there was and, if not, there should be as sourcing to a museum or gallery (which the University would qualify as) has been the standard and used as the sole source on maybe thousands of pages.  Better call in (they may be tired of me calling upon their knowledge) Another Believer and Johnbod .  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 15:09, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Aside from that it would seem that the new sources added above, such as this from the San Jose Museum of Art , would qualify.  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 15:22, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep with new sources as previously stated.  Additionally, speaking purely from an art history perspective here, Baca is clearly notable enough and this work is clearly prominent enough to merit inclusion. -- 19h00s ( talk ) 19:09, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: I'm relisting this discussion as even though there is a consensus to Keep and no support for deletion.  But there is a valid concern about sourcing so hopefully more can be located over the next few days.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:57, 21 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: keep