Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Food For Thought (artwork)

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. Other than the article's creator, editors have found the level of coverage in RS to be lacking. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Food For Thought (artwork)[edit]

[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)

Lack of notability. I'd redirect this to the perp's page, but there is not anything about this work there. Searches throw up zip. TheLongTone (talk) 12:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I find one possible mention of this art piece in a G-Book but it isn't previewed. I also checked the magazines available online from the library, figuring there might be info in art magazines and journals, but nothing. I looked at the artist's article and I admit I also have doubts that they meet notability requirements. Lamona (talk) 16:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wanås is the leading international sculpture park [1] - any art piece exhibited there deserves a mention. MusicFromOutoftheOpera (talk) 09:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a more apt citation for that? That is a travel/promotional magazine, not an art magazine. Also, that article does not mention this work of art. Lamona (talk) 04:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've found some more links rectifying Wanås Sculpture Park as, atleast, internationally reknowned [2], [3],[4]. MusicFromOutoftheOpera (talk) 08:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then again, you can't use the same notability reference to an artpiece almost 30-years-old but I've done what I could providing proof of this artwork's legacy albeit its growing age. MusicFromOutoftheOpera (talk) 08:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of what you have provided fit with the Wikipedia definition of reliable source and none mention this sculpture. I don't think this helps. Lamona (talk) 15:28, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

comment Having something in this sculpture park might help in establishing the notability of an artist with a work there but does not establish the notability of the work.TheLongTone (talk) 13:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough reception to ascertain standalone notability at the moment. I checked the Swedish Mediearkivet, where a two-sentence mention in Expressen came up. "Tydligast blir det kanske i Matthew McCaslins Food for thought, där en videofilmad pastoral idyll har fått sig tillsatt gödselessens i form av halmbalar - utan att det riktigt framgår om det är de betande korna eller deras medialisering som är "poängen", för att säga det på skånska. En poäng i sig, skulle det säkert kunna hävdas - men den förefaller mig i så fall ganska trivial". This is something, although certainly not in-depth. Food For Thought is mentioned at Wanås Castle#Selection of the outdoors exhibitions which shows that almost none of the artworks have their own pages; by the way I don't trust the notion that Wanås is "the leading international sculpture park" either. Geschichte (talk) 05:58, 21 May 2024 (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.