Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perry Picasshoe

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 delete. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:03, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perry Picasshoe

[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)

This young artist does not meet WP criteria for notability per WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST. I am not finding that they have been in significant exhibitions, nor is their work represented in notable museum or national gallery collections, nor have they won notable awards, or part of the art historical record or listed in a dictionary of biography. The current sourcing is very weak, consisting of two student-written pieces in the student newspaper (Daily Bruin) where they attended and a local tabloid, leaving one source, Press Enterprise. No WP:SIGCOV in independent reliable sources over a period of time. All I found in an online BEFORE is social media posts, primary sources like their personal website, or user-submitted content like LinkedIn. Perhaps in a few more years after their work garners attention from art magazines, newspapers and books in the way of reviews and in-depth analyses; at this time it is WP:TOOSOON for an article. Bringing it here for the community to weigh in. Netherzone (talk) 20:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Arts, Visual arts, and California. Netherzone (talk) 20:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - can't find enough in-depth coverage to show that it passes WP:GNG, and can't see how it passes WP:NARTIST.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:57, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete On grounds of WP:ARTIST, due to the dearth of sources. --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 07:37, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The source shoutout is an interview as is VoyageLA. That leaves the Daily Bruin. The article doesn't have RS and I can't find any other information online. Definitely WP:TOOSOON. Also looking at the article's history one can see it was created for the "Chicana Latina Art and Artists" class. Unfortunately, the instructor for this class based the grade on the student publishing to the main space, leading to not ready for primetime additions. WomenArtistUpdates (talk)16:53, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on 2 citations being interview and remaining not enough. Kakara69 (talk) 07:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since subject fails WP:GNG and certainly WP:CREATIVE. The sources cited in the text are not adequate nor enough but searching beyond them one comes up with simply more of nothing. -The Gnome (talk) 16:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOOSOON and WP:NARTIST. While they have had a few exhibits in the LA area (showing some notability), they have not done any important residencies (I'm looking for Boffo, APCG, Yaddo, or FIAR for LGBTQIA+ artists), art museums (for example, a work in the Leslie-Lohman Art Museum), nor have received any significant awards (Lumen, Pulitzer, etc.). They literally have had no real recognition yet. Bearian (talk) 19:45, 11 April 2023 (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.