Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Bissonnette

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Bissonnette

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Larry Bissonnette (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

See delete discussion for Tito Mukhopadhyay and Amy Sequenzia. This is the same issue, we do not have independent RS that Bissonnette has authored these works. This violates BLP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tito_Mukhopadhyay and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amy_Sequenzia_(2nd_nomination) Sgerbic (talk) 01:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Sgerbic (talk) 01:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. Sgerbic (talk) 01:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I also gave the article a major trim. Are we even allowed to talk about someone's psychological diagnosis without sources? The last version did. Removed.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
These are brief mentions and not enough to establish notability, at least one is a interview with Bissonnette. As Bissonnette is using FC to communicate, the interview is actually with the facilitator not Bissonnette. Sgerbic (talk) 16:34, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I cannot confirm that Bissonnette's art is in the collection of the Musée de l'Art Brut in Switzerland, as stated in the article, but his work -is- in the collection of the Lille Métropole Museum of Modern, Contemporary and Outsider Art See [1]
    That work from 1976 predates the use of assistive devices by 15 years. It is possible that those works were not created by Bisonette. I find no reliable sources saying his works are forgeries. I do see documentary evidence of Bisonette painting. His artwork, at least, appears to be his own. Vexations (talk) 01:54, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Henry Moore also did not make most of his work, he used "facilitated production", i.e studio assistants!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:11, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not familiar with the collection in the Lille, generally having art owned by a museum is not enough to prove notability, often times they "collect" art they do not display. Sgerbic (talk) 16:39, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sgerbic, generally having art owned by a museum is not enough to prove notability WP:ARTIST says nothing about the work in the collection being on display to establish notability. It does say represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums To clarify (and I apologize if this is superfluous): the permanent collection of a museum is not always on display in its entirety. "Several", on the other hand,is an issue here: I can only confirm ONE museum collection. Vexations (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sgerbic, it's the selection for the collection that is the important aspect for determining notability. When museums collect, they commit with great care as they are also committing to represent the art of the time in question, and to keep that are safe and dry for what could be centuries. Regarding whether it is on display or not, see this article in the NY Times that quotes the Metropolitan Museum of Art as having two million objects in its collection, and less than one percent of that on display. It's entirely normal. Per WP:ARTIST, as Vexations points out, it is the selection of the work, rather than the display of the work, that is important. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:19, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see any reviews of his art from art critics in national or international newspapers. Apparently, the art piece the Bennington Museum has was a gift. (From the article, it didn't look like the art piece was purchased by the museum). I looked in Global Newstream (a database for newspapers worldwide). Generally, if someone is notable, all kinds of articles pop up.

'The matter of creative impulse' The Burlington Free Press; Burlington, Vt. [Burlington, Vt]01 Sep 2013: 10. Bennington Museum receives remarkable gifts over last year Carson, Derek. Bennington Banner; Bennington, Vt. [Bennington, Vt]26 July 2015. Sgerbic (talk) 22:13, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all of the AFDs mentioned in the nomination seem to have to do with something called "facilitated communication", which is apparently discredited. If I disregard FC and his own artwork, and look only at the sources, this is notable individual as there is decent coverage. The main topic for notability here is his individual story, not his artworks. See the book links above, and the sources added to the article, as well as the museum collection found by Vexations. Meets WP:GNG. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:59, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep It seems while FC is definitely discredited, he is more famous as an artist and simply for being in Wretches & Jabberers. I did add sources that showed that his usage of FC is doubtful. I would like more opinions on this, however. Ylevental (talk) 20:28, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vermont-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 04:14, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per references above. From my POV, he clearly passes WP:ARTIST. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 14:59, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The bottom line on Bissonnette is - does the art by itself make the artist worthy of a Wikipedia page? Does having art purchased by a museum (or maybe a couple museums which we can't find evidence for) make the artist worthy of a Wikipedia page? If so, then we are probably missing thousands of pages for artists. That criteria is pretty low. Anything reported to be said by Bissonnette is not from him but his facilitator. We don't know his intentions with his art. Sgerbic (talk) 22:25, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Those are interesting thoughts– but they are not related to our notability policy. Being purchased by a museum does contribute to notability, per WP:ARTIST. Appraising the artwork itself is not necessary at all as we go by the appraisal of others, in secondary sources. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:17, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Significant and Substantial are what the policy refers to. "The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." Do we have evidence that Bissonnette's work has hit this bar? Sgerbic (talk) 06:29, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am just starting to look for sources myself, and to consider sources noted by other editors in this AfD discussion. I would note that WP:ARTIST does not require "Significant and Substantial" work - it says "The person's work (or works) has: ..... or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." So what we are looking for is his work in several notable collections - or lots of reviews (for the "significant critical attention"), or, for WP:GNG, significant coverage about him (and the National Geographic TV episode is surely one such source about him). RebeccaGreen (talk) 06:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Meets WP:BASIC at the very least, whether or not he meets WP:ARTIST. I have been adding sources, and I see that there is coverage about him in independent reliable sources from at least 1990 to 2014. RebeccaGreen (talk) 07:58, 2 August 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Larry_Bissonnette&oldid=908999193"