Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan Braderman

:{{la|Joan Braderman}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Joan_Braderman Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Joan Braderman}})

Fails to meet any of the filmmaker notability criteria. Does not otherwise meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. Jack Frost (talk) 02:50, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

• We do have a passage on her in [https://books.google.ca/books?id=4UK0AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA119&dq=%22Joan+Braderman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwic7o7Gr7_SAhVBzoMKHUU1AOAQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=%22Joan%20Braderman%22&f=false Jewish Identities in American Feminist Art: Ghosts of Ethnicity], in [https://books.google.ca/books?id=mDBjLL1ZDWoC&pg=PA146&dq=%22Joan+Braderman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwic7o7Gr7_SAhVBzoMKHUU1AOAQ6AEIPjAG#v=onepage&q=%22Joan%20Braderman%22&f=false Guilty Pleasures: Feminist Camp from Mae West to Madonna], [https://books.google.ca/books?id=ZUtZCfvJkboC&pg=PA145&dq=%22Joan+Braderman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwic7o7Gr7_SAhVBzoMKHUU1AOAQ6AEIIjAB#v=onepage&q=%22Joan%20Braderman%22&f=false Seeing Through the Eighties: Television and Reaganism] and so on. It appears to be her 1986 feminist video art piece Joan Does Dynasty which was particularly notable. For me, there's enough in Gbooks about her to satisfy GNG. Keep Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:37, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

• Keep meets WP:FILMMAKER4b has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition. The Whitney Biennial is very significant. Mduvekot (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
• That's a good point and to that I would add [https://www.moma.org/calendar/film/993 MoMA Presents: Joan Braderman’s The Heretics], shown quite a few years after the creation of the work in question -- a good indication of lasting notability. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:25, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep The Whitney Biennale qualifies as one of the most significant exhibitons out there. Meets WP:ARTIST. 104.163.140.193 (talk) 12:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep She is an incredibly important figure in the history of video art. She is professor emerita at Hampshire College and has been awarded some of the most prestigious grants available to artists in the United States. She has had solo screenings of her films at the Museum of Modern Art and has been in the Whitney Biennial. I've added a bunch of sources and more information. Situated (talk) 21:33, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:ARTIST and WP:FILMMAKER. Hmlarson (talk) 21:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
• Speedy keep No question about notability. The Whitney Biennial does it. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 12:18, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.