Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nurse paintings

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 of the debate was REDIRECT to Richard Prince. There seems little support for the standalone article but certainly insufficient support to delete it outright. This being the only suggested redirect target, it will do for now and is amendable at will. -Splash^talk 22:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nurse paintings

minor branch of a subject, vanity page, no meaningful content other than an external link. KarlBunker 11:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete For reasons above. Perhaps should be a redirect to artist Richard Prince's page. KarlBunker 11:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Merging would be a good idea. A redirect would depend on how commonly the name is used for those paintings. JPD (talk) 11:45, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn. --Terence Ong 14:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. — ciphergoth 17:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Merge (rather than redirect) to the Richard Prince article. The title suggests an entire genre of work, but it's only Prince doing it. --Lockley 18:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Article is being expanded (by me). It is not a vanity page as it is about the artwork not the artist. The series of paintings is one of the few serious artistic attempts to explore issues of stereotyping of nurses. The artist is notable and the paintings have been widely exhibited. Google for "nurse paintings" gets 521 hits. " 'Richard Prince' artist " gets 191,000 hits. "Pulp fiction art" gets 6,350,000 hits. So the subject of this article is notable in TWO areas--nursing, and art. Mr. Bunker deleted the stub article with no notice or explanation and now has proposed it for deletion after I complained to him about his vandalism. Is there a new policy forbidding stubs? Deletion of articles should be taken quite seriously and those voting for deletion should do a little research before flippantly voting as an instant reflex. Thanks. THB 18:50, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I apologize (again) for deleting the article without going through the proper procedure. The stub status of the article isn't the issue. I don't believe that a single series of paintings by an artist of less than monumental stature is a valid topic for an article.KarlBunker 19:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Please read my note above and review the Wikipedia guidelines for Notability, verification of notability, criteria for deletion, etc. I accept your apology but hope that you understand that that type of behavior is completely contrary to the basic concepts of Wikipedia. Thanks. THB 19:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, Richard Prince may be of "less than monumental stature" but his artwork has sold for $US 1,000,000 and set records at auction. That would suggest that he is considered "important" in the art world, although I agree "monumental stature" still would be a stretch. THB 19:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

One of the paintings was used on a Sonic Youth music album cover "Sonic Nurse". The article has been expanded and notability made more evident to the casual reader. THB 21:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Merge/redirect to Richard Prince. These do deserve mention, but not in their own article. Prince is minorly important in the art world, and as such definitely deserves his own article, but the nurse paintings are better mentioned as part of that rather than with their own separate article. And let's face it, the artist's own article is hardly big enough to need splitting. Grutness...wha? 23:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Richard Prince per above. Stifle 00:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

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.