Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Museo Benini

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) ––FormalDude (talk) 04:00, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Museo Benini

[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)

I'm embarrassed to see that I accepted this from draft earlier this year, looking at it now I can't imagine why. Benini is not notable enough for an article so it's unlikely that this museum is notable either. Theroadislong (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:03, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Appears to pass WP:SIGCOV. The museum was the subject of a documentary film covered in RS, and the artist and museum have had had significant independent coverage in multiple sources. It's likely both the museum and the artist would pass AFD. However, I do think it would be better to have a single article on the artist which also covered the museum. See the following for examples of significant coverage on the museum and/or the artist: [1], [2], [3], [4] These are just a few sources, but there are others.4meter4 (talk) 23:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While I can find a few sources about the museum, I find it odd that the artist himself does not seem notable - I can't find anything about him other than what is on his site and the film. The articles I do find read as promotions and most have copied text from the museum site (including referring to him as an "internationally known artist"). As for the film, I looked at the credits on the film (http://www.muellervideo.com/) and my impression is that it was done "on spec," probably paid for by the artist himself. To be notable an artist needs critical reviews and works in significant museums. That his work is in a museum that he created doesn't really count. The museum isn't mentioned outside of "things to see" kinds of articles in local sources, mostly parroting promotional wording from the museum web site. Lamona (talk) 02:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing in Books, Jstor or Gscholar; the museum is not a decade old yet. I suppose it hasn't attracted much critical attention yet. Oaktree b (talk) 00:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Here's a source that does give us more information about the artist and his background - scroll downwards below his image. 1 And here's another one that focuses almost exclusively on the artist and his background. 2 — Maile (talk) 11:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at both of those (they are sources on the article) and they don't convince me. First, they seem to be minor publications with only a local reach. Second, the information in those and on the museum site are worded very similarly with nearly identical information. "... Benini loaded everything he owned into a DC-9, and headed to Evington," "In 1978, Benini charted a DC-9, flew to Palm Beach with all his possessions and bought a home in Evinston," etc. (Notice "Evington" which is a typo - not a good sign.) Both rely heavily on quotes from him about his life, although they aren't actually interviews. I find no scholarly works and no works of a national reach that speak of him. The museum does not seem to have a curator (just Benini and his wife). Museums usually list funders and there is nothing here that says where the funding comes from. I checked in an Art journal database and found this one link which is a 1p reproduction, presumably of one of his art pieces: "New Art Examiner; January 1986, Vol. 13, p18A-18A, 1p". It doesn't seem to be online but in any case one page in all of the art journal index isn't much. My conclusion is that neither he nor his museum seem to be much recognized in the world of art. Lamona (talk) 03:28, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:SIGCOV Bruxton (talk) 21:52, 22 November 2022 (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.