Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephane Graff

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 no consensus Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:08, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stephane Graff

Stephane Graff (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)

There does not appear to be major commentary on his work, and there is no statement that any of it is in the permanent collection of a major museum. Almost all the article is his own comment on his own work., reprinted in various places, or in publications such as "What's On", which is not a RS for art reviews. DGG ( talk ) 01:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 01:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 01:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 01:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous objective and reputable sources used, such as Le Monde, The Sunday Times, the Daily Telegraph, Eyemazing and a museum website. User DGG seems to have commented selectively on one of the most obscure, yet nonetheless acceptable sources "What's On", and it is simply untrue that this source is a reprint of the artist's comment on his own work. There is one acceptable and published source written by the artist which has sometimes been cited alongside other authors to support statements. The article draws material from a variety of authors and a total of 24 sources. Graff's work was recently exhibited in the Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art in Nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A De Lacy (talk • contribs)

• Comment - while the sourcing is terrible, there may be some evidence of notability for having had exhibited in major cities. Can we get an expert opinion here? Bearian (talk) 00:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I find it a bit odd to say the sourcing is terrible. There are some bad sources, yes, but also some good ones. The only problem is none of the good ones are online so its a hard to tell if they amount to anything or are just brief mentions. Several of the sources are brochures published on the event on a gallery exhibition - these may be reliable for certain information, but don't really convey notability. Others, e.g. Contemporary Art, Arts Review, and Sanat Dünyamiz may be legitimate reviews that establish notability. If A De Lacy is willing to email me page scans of the sources, I would be happy to take a look. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thaddeus B,

Thank you for your comment and the opportunity to provide further verification. I have included a link to scans of some source material below. You should find a total of 51 scans. To clarify, 9 of these are covers identifying the beginning of a publication and these covers do not include images of Graff's work. The large Eyemazing book published by Thames & Hudson is an image based publication intended to showcase collectible contemporary photography, hence the scan of the short biography near the end of the book. (Graff had a 6 page spread, but I have not included scans of the images.) I have not included any publications by galleries as I understand that these cannot establish notability. However, scans of extensive texts from gallery publications can also be provided if desired.

http://s284.photobucket.com/user/Ava__D/library/?sort=6&evt=email_share_media&page=1

Below are links to Christie's and Phillip's auction results and a related web page, in order to establish the market value of the artists photographic work. These evidence that Graff's work has been collected and auctioned alongside images by Man Ray, Irving Penn, Norman Parkinson, Mapplethorpe, Louise Dahl-Wolfe, Bettina Rheims, Erwin Blumenfeld, Paolo Roversi, David Bailey and Phillip Halsman, among other prominent photographers.

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/photographs/stephane-graff-constriction-iv-round-constriction-and-5421050-details.aspx

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/photographs/stephane-graff-corps-en-morceaux-i-and-5421052-details.aspx

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/photographs/stephane-graff-rear-constriction-i-and-constriction-5421051-details.aspx

http://www.vogue.it/en/people-are-talking-about/parties-events/2011/04/feminine-ideal-christies#ad-image78156

http://www.phillips.com/detail/STEPHANE-GRAFF/UK000110/178

http://www.artvalue.com/auctionresult--graff-stephane-1965-france-mongolian-contortionist-2731519.htm

Thanks again for taking the time to consider this article.

P.S.

An additional museum group exhibition "The London Twelve" was held here: http://www.czechtourism.com/c/prague-city-gallery/

I have uploaded scans of the exhibition catalogue to the photobucket album: http://s284.photobucket.com/user/Ava__D/library/?sort=6&evt=email_share_media&page=1

An online article about this museum show: http://www.kultura21.cz/vytvarne-umeni/4770-london-twelve — Preceding unsigned comment added by A De Lacy (talk • contribs) 10:04, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - subject has received significant coverage in multiple print magazines and thus qualifies as notable under the general notability guidelines. Thanks, A De Lacy for the scans to confirm it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. May I remove the deletion notice from the article? -A De Lacy — Preceding undated comment added 18:52, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After this discussion completes (scheduled for April 30), an uninvolved party will assess the consensus. Unless they decide to relist it (due to insufficient comments), they will remove the tag at that time. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• comment the auction rrcords above are irrelevant. We're not a art sales price guide. Using them --even citing them--indicates the promotional intent. If there should be an article it should be started over by someone with a NPOV approach. DGG ( talk ) 04:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the auction results. I'm very new to Wikipedia and was unsure if they might support notability. Auction results indicate inclusion in collections, which I thought might be relevant. They are not referenced anywhere in the actual article, only in this discussion, so I do not think the article itself should be judged for this. I do not have promotional intent and am not at all commercially involved with the artist. -A De Lacy

• Delete - searching on Google finds no independent coverage of the subject. Coverage that exists is either produced by the subject or by galleries, auction houses, etc that have a biased interest in promoting the subject.--Rpclod (talk) 14:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not everything reliable source is found by Google. As such, this is a poor argument to make, see WP:GHITS. See the scans of print publications that establish notability above. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:HEY. The sources found have convinced me that he is a notable photographer per WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG. Bearian (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2015 (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.