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. RL0919 (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Rosa[edit]

Christian Rosa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Previous nomination was "no consensus" with little participation. I'm not seeing any significant coverage in strong third party sources. The Vice articles is about his mentor, and the Variety article is a review of a film he was executive producer on. As far as WP:CREATIVE, I don't see anything about him having permanent works in a major collection, or obviously meeting any of the other criteria. ArtNet might qualify as an RS, though an editor to the article seems very adamant about not including recent articles about Rosa from Artnet. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:50, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is a bit borderline, as some decent reviews exist (e.g. the Guardian, Artforum and the LA Times), but there is just not much else out there that is more than a name check. GNG fail. --- Possibly ☎ 20:17, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found another in-depth mention in the Observer. --- Possibly ☎ 20:28, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep there are enough reviews in RS to easily pass WP:GNG even if many of the sources slight his work. Some of his pieces reportedly selling for over $200K adds credibility if not notability as well. Curiocurio (talk) 01:28, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Curiocurio:, as far as I know, sale prices of artworks have zero impact on notability here. I have never seen it mentioned in any policy or guideline. The main reason something sells for a high price is a result of there being a buyer with lots of money who wants the work, as well as other market factors. A big ticket art sale is not based on what we find useful for judging notability: writers and critics providing critical opinions. Without the rich people, you have no story there; said another way, rich people do not have any input on who we consider notable. --- Possibly ☎ 02:03, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that auction prices do not contribute to notability, but at the same time it's hard to command those sorts of prices without some sort of critical attention (although it does happen). I think reviews in the Observer, Guardian, L. A. Times, and N.Y. Times (from the first AFD) are sufficient to pass WP:GNG. Curiocurio (talk) 13:00, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that only one of his works have sold for over 200k back in the early 2010's when he was for a short time hot, more recently, his works have sold for less than 50k. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I made an effort and found 10 examples of very strong coverage recognizing his work and creativity for also WP:CREATIVE, from White Cube Gallery, Nowness, the Guardian, Zeit, Artforum, Coveteur, Harpers Bazaar to THE People from the Art’s field. See Simon de Pury photographing Mr. Rosas at his own studio ( see link). Happy to include these links for accuracy on the page.

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/12/arts/international/galleries-try-to-find-their-niche.html?_r=0 2.http://www.welt.de/kultur/kunst-und-architektur/article136996297/Rosa-ist-gross-unerwachsen-und-transformierwillig.html 3. https://harpersbazaar.uol.com.br/cultura/christina-rosa-mais-que-nada/ 4.http://www.complex.com/style/2014/01/artists-to-watch-2014/christian-rosa 5.http://whitecube.com/artists/christian_rosa/ 6.https://www.nowness.com/story/christian-rosa 7. https://coveteur.com/2017/07/13/artist-christian-rosa-painter-leonardo-dicaprio-jay-z/ 8. https://www.welt.de/kultur/kunst-und-architektur/article136996297/Rosa-ist-gross-unerwachsen-und-transformierwillig.html 9. https://www.kunstverein-heilbronn.de/node/316 10. http://cargocollective.com/flatsurface/Christian-Rosa 11. https://whitecube.com/exhibitions/exhibition/christian_rosa_sao_paulo_2015 12. https://www.thedailybeast.com/simon-de-purys-studio-tours-of-los-angeles-artists-photos Further two publications of Christian Rosa were published so far over Snoeck Publishing : 15.https://www.apollo-magazine.com/provisional-painting-or-slacker-abstraction-christian-rosa-at-white-cube/ 16.https://www.kunstverein-heilbronn.de/node/316 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panghea (talk • contribs) — Panghea (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Note: User Panghea has not responded to COI notices and a request for clarification on the COIN noticeboard. --- Possibly ☎ 20:03, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The referencing is very poor and there is no converage to indicate if the articles passes WP:NARTIST. Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. List of galleries above doesn't prove anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scope creep (talk • contribs) 20:50, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Vexations (talk) 19:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The 2015 article in Apollo which I added as a reference includes discussion of the critical reception elsewhere of the artist's work. That, along with the Anne Phillipi's 2015 Die Welt article and other reviews from critics such as Laura Cumming (also added as a reference), and possibly a David Geers article in frieze which no longer appears to be available online, is indicative of the attention needed for WP:NARTIST criterion 4(c). AllyD (talk) 08:32, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Per the sources provided here and the previous deletion discussion on Rosa's talk page, the reasons for keeping are stronger than 5 years ago. There is enough for a WP:GNG pass and Rosa's 2011 Walter Koschatzky Art Prize win passes WP:ANYBIO as well. Heartmusic678 (talk) 13:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep Coverage and prize easily enough. Sheijiashaojun (talk) 01:31, 15 August 2021 (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.