Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadia Lichtig

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nadia Lichtig

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

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional, no real claim of notability or independent sources. Biruitorul ^Talk 21:34, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, and France. Shellwood (talk) 21:45, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 23:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This artist meets WP:NARTIST criteria #4 and WP:GNG criteria for inclusion. A very quick online WP:BEFORE search finds that her inclusion in the Pompidou Centre permanent collection is verifiable (citation added); she has a permanent public artwork in the city of Sérignan through the Musée d'art contemporain de Sérignan 1% program [1]; significant in-depth coverage (reviews, articles) in reliable sources can be found on the internet. The article sourcing should be improved to reflect her notability, and the resume/CV like form and tone should be trimmed and refined, but it should not be deleted. Netherzone (talk) 23:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Regarding the Pompidou exhibition, I think we’re still not there in terms of notability under criterion 4b, which stipulates that the artist’s work must be “represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums”. Not only is one not equivalent to several, but I doubt the work itself qualifies as “representation”. It’s a single photo, reproduced eight times, in a room full of photos by 124 artists. No ordinary visitor would ever be able to tell Lichtig is there: at most, she’s on a long list of names in small print.
- Meanwhile, the Musée d'art contemporain de Sérignan isn’t necessarily notable, is it? I’m aware of the fr.wiki article, but it’s nearly unsourced. — Biruitorul ^Talk 07:19, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I find nothing at the data.bnf.fr or in Gallica, the ULAN list doesn't hit on her name. No article in French wiki either. Oaktree b (talk) 00:51, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The French article does exist, I fixed wikidata. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 06:49, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ (downgraded to uncertain weak keep, see comments below) Her work is in the permanent collection of more than one notable gallery, which therefore satisfies criteria 4 of WP:ARTIST CT55555 (talk) 08:38, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep criteria 4 (WP:Before is your friend). Randy Kryn (talk) 08:57, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — the singular of criteria is criterion and it’s rather distressing that this isn’t known here, of all places. More to the point, I’ve suggested above that the subject in fact does not meet criterion 4. For example, CT55555, you assert that her work “is in the permanent collection of more than one notable gallery”. What’s the second one, presuming the first to be the dubious Pompidou exhibit? — Biruitorul ^Talk 21:16, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's increasingly common to use criteria as singular, but maybe still an outlier. Sorry for your distress. :-)

Several of the organizations in the "Collections" section are notable and have their own articles on English and French wikipedia. I recognize that we're on English Wikipedia, and the quality of French wikipedia is an unknown here, so I recognise that I'm being charitable, some examples are URDLA, École des Beaux-Arts, Terra Foundation for American Art, Regional Museum of Contemporary Art Occitanie.

I do recognize that claims to be in these exhibitions are not all cited, I had noticed this one that is cited when translated doesn't seem as grand as it does in the article, the permanent exhibition is in a high school, not the Regional Museum of Contemporary Art Occitanie https://www.ville-serignan.fr/en/a-voir-a-faire/patrimoine-et-sites-remarquables/creations-contemporaines/ but when I Read the details the permeant exhibition is in a school, not the museum.

My belief that she was in multiple notable permanent exbibits came from the link to École des Beaux-Arts I googled her name and saw her affiliation, but upon more careful analysis today, the links when translated are about her studying there, rather than exhibiting and my language skills now leave me with doubts.

So now I'm conflicted between the very PROMO nature of this article (minus point), the lack of citations (minus point), the huge amount of content about her online (plus point) combined with my ability to decipher it.

I'm now left with the impression she is notable, but it doesn't stand up well to scrutiny. Currently wavering on a very weak keep, open to comments on the above, especially from those with relevant language skills and research efforts. CT55555 (talk) 00:21, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: General notability is confirmed by the large number of news items which turn up simply by searching under News on the English version of Google. She is mentioned on many sites in connection with publications connected with her work and her exhibitions, for example here.--Ipigott (talk) 11:00, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Requesting another opinion about my check against Earwig. It seems to lift standard biographical data from existing sources. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:29, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
KeepSubject meets WP:NARTIST criteria #4.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2022 (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.