Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red 76

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Red 76}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Red 76}})

A collective is an organization/company therefore, fall sunder the purview of WP:NCORP. A sentence in NY Times does not constitute WP:SIGCOV. I'm not locating the type of coverages to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:SIRS to be sustained notable. Graywalls (talk) 03:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Companies, and Oregon. Graywalls (talk) 03:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
• Keep I disagree that WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH are the appropriate guidelines by which to judge artistic endeavors, but even by those stringent criteria this is a clear keep, due to the extensive critical analysis and commentary in [https://www.artforum.com/print/200603/red76-10504 this Artforum article] and reviews such as [https://www.portlandmercury.com/Art/2006/01/12/35939/welcome-to-the-ghosttown this in the Portland Mercury]. Other sources are available but those are the best two I have located. The Modern Painters citation in the article may also be significant coverage but I have not found it available online. Jfire (talk) 04:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

:: I have posted additional potential sources on the article talk page. Jfire (talk) 04:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

:: I located the Modern Painters article; it's available via Wikipedia Library: [https://wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?auth=production&url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asu&AN=505061098&site=eds-live&scope=site]. It is not significant coverage, merely a mention in an article about the Portland art scene circa 2003. Nevertheless, the other sources suffice to establish notability. Jfire (talk) 05:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

::: Rather than discuss your agreement/disagreement, please guide the discussion to which policy/guideline or prior discussion consensus suggest that "art collectives" are not evaluated as organization. Using organization evaluation, local weeklies like the Portland Mercury and Willamette Week are not able to satisfy WP:AUD. Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia. Some local organizations of importance to the local community aren't guaranteed a placement in the global encyclopedia. Graywalls (talk) 05:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

::: {{ping|Jfire}}, upon checking with WP:RSN; I've got two inputs from uninvolved editors that [https://magazine.art21.org/2009/08/17/sam-gould-red76/ Art 21] magazine and especially those before 2013 wouldn't be a WP:RS and they suggested it to be treated as a group blog, meaning that it ought to not be considered for establishing notability. Graywalls (talk) 00:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

::::I agree with the conclusion on RSN that pre-2013 content from Art 21 is not RS. However, my keep rationale does not rely on this source in order to demonstrate notability; that's based on the extensive Artforum article and Portland Mercury review. Jfire (talk) 01:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

::::: The Portland Mercury is hyper-local alternative weekly. When it was doing prints, it was only distributed within Portland, perhaps a smaller areas just outside the city limits as well. Within Portland, it focused on local events. So it has a very narrow audience reach and in evaluating WP:NCORP criteria, such local coverage has relatively little weight. Think of it like high school paper that covers some on-campus affairs or neighborhood newsletter that cover some neighborhood affairs in great details. If the contents covered there have garnered wider coverage, such as in regional or national paper, those papers can be used to augment the better source to support the contents but they're of little use for the purpose of establishing notability. Graywalls (talk) 10:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

::::::WP:AUD expressly does not require that all sources used to establish notability have larger-than-local audience. {{tq|Evidence of significant coverage by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability... at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary}}. That criterion is satisfied by the Artforum profile. Artforum is an international publication, "the art world’s most prominent magazine" as CJR [https://www.cjr.org/special_report/artforum-david-velasco-metoo.php has put it]. Virtually any artist or artistic collective profiled in Artforum will have substantial coverage in other sources, and we see that is the case here. (Again, don't take my argument here as accepting the precedent that we should be applying WP:NCORP standards to artistic collectives. I'm accepting that premise in this instance only because I think Red76 passes them anyway.) Jfire (talk) 17:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 10:44, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:36, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

:I mean, yes they're covered in the New York Times, I wouldn't call it substantial. I don't find any extensive coverage of them. Delete unless we have at least one extensive source about them, which I don't see. Oaktree b (talk) 16:58, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

::I would say the Artforum article is extensive. Jfire (talk) 22:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.

  1. {{cite news |last=Stadler |first=Matthew |date=March 2006 |title=RED76 |url=https://www.artforum.com/print/200603/red76-10504 |magazine=Artforum |volume=44 |issue=7 |pages=95–96 |id={{ProQuest|214355536}} |accessdate=2023-01-22 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20230122074331/https://www.artforum.com/print/200603/red76-10504 |archivedate=2023-01-22 }}

     The article notes: "In Portland, Oregon, two people with no art school training and scant interest in art history, calling themselves Red76, prevailed upon a half-dozen friends to loan them the modest resources needed for a month-long cluster of “art events,” called Ghosttown, 2006. ... Ghosttown is typical of Red76, a self-described “arts group” founded in 2000 with shifting membership that (this time around) included Sam Gould and Khris Soden. Red76 has enabled similar exchanges through projects like Dim Sum, 2002– (a show-and-tell buffet of in-progress artwork served with a sit-down breakfast), Little Cities, 2005– (cut-and-paste parties to make model cities), and Laundry Lectures, 2003– (talks given at Laundromats), both inside and outside art institutions in North America and Europe, including the Drawing Center in New York, Southern Exposure in San Francisco, and the Autonomous Cultural Center in Weimar, Germany."

  2. {{cite news |last=Motley |first=John |date=2006-01-12 |title=Welcome to the Ghosttown: Arts Collective Red76 Throws a Month-Long Citywide Art Project—and You're Invited! |url=https://www.portlandmercury.com/Art/2006/01/12/35939/welcome-to-the-ghosttown |newspaper=Portland Mercury |accessdate=2023-01-22 |archiveurl=https://archive.today/2023.01.22-074733/https://www.portlandmercury.com/Art/2006/01/12/35939/welcome-to-the-ghosttown |archivedate=2023-01-22 }}

     The article notes: "Community is a topic that has long preoccupied Red76, which was founded in 2000. Through participatory events that more closely resemble house parties than anything you'd find in a gallery, Red76 has quietly asked big questions without spoiling the fun by being pretentious or pedantic. In 2004, its "New York Public Archive" project, held in New York City's Drawing Center, asked citizens to contribute drawings of what they saw, heard, and felt during that summer. The end result was an impressionistic collection of moments from more than 2,000 New Yorkers. A little more recently and closer to home, Red76 hosted a series of parties, called "Little Cities," in which guests literally made little cities out of cardboard, paint, and hot glue."

  3. {{cite news |last=Williams |first=Lee |date=2006-02-05 |title=Art? Maybe |url=https://infoweb.newsbank.com/apps/news/document-view?p=WORLDNEWS&docref=news/10FA74514E074B18&f=basic |newspaper=The Oregonian |accessdate=2023-01-22 |archiveurl=https://archive.today/2023.01.22-074302/https://infoweb.newsbank.com/apps/news/document-view?p=WORLDNEWS&docref=news/10FA74514E074B18&f=basic |archivedate=2023-01-22 }}

     The article notes: "Not Red76. The six-year-old independent Portland art collective says art can be created from everyday events, installed in neighborhood watering holes and toasted, say, with a frosty can of Pabst. And throughout January, Red76 did just that. The group launched its most ambitious project yet, "Ghosttown," a monthlong series of small, often memory-based events that 76's founder Sam Gould would collectively call a "living museum of the everyday."  Red76 provided the catalyst for the memories, the framework for new connections and further discussion. The free events occurred at ordinary places around the city --from an outdoor public kitchen behind an art gallery to a smoky, Northeast watering hole."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Red76 to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 07:56, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

:*Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Audience says:

The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of significant coverage by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary.

Artforum meets the "Audience" requirement because it is an international magazine that Columbia Journalism Review [https://www.cjr.org/special_report/artforum-david-velasco-metoo.php called] "the art world's most prominent magazine". The Oregonian meets the "Audience" requirement because it is a statewide newspaper and is "the largest newspaper in Oregon and the second largest in the Pacific Northwest by circulation".

Cunard (talk) 07:56, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on Cunard's sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

:* Keep @Cunard has made a convincing argument above that it meets GNG.

:QuintinK (talk) 03:54, 24 January 2023 (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.