207:: notability of the artwork has not been established by cited sources. A local newspaper discusses the artwork in one article, but this single source alone is not enough to establish notability. The other sources either do not mention the artwork, or are not independent of the artist, or are not discussing the artwork beyond a single mention in a list of works by the artist, or are a local public artworks catalogue: all cannot establish the notability of this specific sculpture. I couldn't determine one source from an architecture website, but it is a source for information not directly about the artwork. I discussed the issue on the talk page, but the notability warning kept being removed without the notability being established by the cited sources, so I believe the article should be deleted. Editør (
331:'s original suggestion (now apparently abandoned) was to merge it with Sutton Hoo. Yet in either article much of the information would be irrelevant. Placed in Sutton Hoo, the "Themes" section about how the sculpture fits into Kirby's oeuvre would be inappropriate, and placed in the Kirby article, much of the "Background" section would be tangential—not to mention the disproportionate weight that would be given there to a single one of his artworks. As an article by itself, it is a short, self-contained article able an important and cool sculpture. --
990:— How do Cocke 2009 and Cocke 2013 establish this artwork's notability? Obviously the reasoning that any and all artworks described in a catalogue of local public artworks are notable isn't valid. And if, as I have argued, these sources cannot establish the artwork's notability, which sources are able to do so (together with the local newspaper Ipswich Star 2002)? — Editør (
655:
In general, local newspapers can vary in quality and reliability, while some are dedicated to indepentent journalism, others will directly print press releases as articles. I don't know the
Ipswitch Star and looking at the source I don't immediately see any issues, but in my opinion this source alone
920:
into Kirby's article gives it a disproportionate weight compared to the rest of his works. Further, Colapeninsula, if you wouldn't mind taking another brief look, I don't think that much of the content is duplicated—it was, but that was only because Prince of
Thieves copied over the content without
1071:
When you look at the list of cited sources (that was pasted above), there is just not enough there to establish notability. There is one local newspaper article and that's basically all there is. Half the sources don't mention the artwork, the other half aren't independent from the artist or don't
696:
article, relating it both to the actual helmet, and to Kirby's work. Re: the first two sources you mention above (Cocke 2009/2013), I'm not sure where your statement comes from that they cover "all" public sculpture, not just that which is sufficiently notable.
859:. It's unclear without studying the sources more closely whether Kirby is notable, but it seems certain that if he only has one sculpture worth writing about in detail, it's unnecessary to have two articles with substantially duplicated content. --
172:
1046:
Not all independently catalogued artworks are automatically notable in the context of
Knowledge (XXG), which would follow from the argument that the catalogue entries establish notability this artwork (which they do not). — Editør
678:
Some new sources have been added, but the new sources are about (the background of) the visitor centre, not the sculpture that is the subject of this article. As such they cannot establish the notability of the sculpture. – Editør
447:
The
Ipswich star is about the museum and briefly mentions the sculpture, Cocke 2009 is nominally about the sculpture but mostly talks about other things, I can't access Cocke 2013, Axle Arts is a sales catalogue.
656:
is not enough to establish the sculpture's notability. If no additional sources that establish notability can be found, maybe the relevant content can be moved to the paragraph about the visitor center in
469:. I would point out that the inspiration for the Ipswich Star article is the sculpture's arrival at the visitor centre, and that the additional detail in Cocke 2013 serves to contextualize the artwork. --
166:
290:
I see no real need for this information to be in a separate article and not on Kirby's page. To demonstrate how it would fit, I merged all the relevant content from this article into the
125:
375:
566:
961:
per Cas Liber. I agree also that merging with other articles, either Kirby or Sutton Hoo, would lend it disproportionate weight, given the amount of material in the article.
276:
As previously explained on the talk page, a catalogue of local public artworks does not automatically establish notability of an/every artwork in the catalogue. – Editør (
98:
93:
826:
The article has been around since 2006, and now its deletion seems appropriate? We may as well keep the discussions separate—(as I see it) Kirby is notable by himself,
390:
102:
85:
585:. I've copied the discussion below from the articles talk page. The nom for this AfD has comprehensively rebutted all of the references included in the article.
132:
1018:
Independent and reliable means they are appropriate sources of information, but given the type of work it doesn't say anything about the notability. — Editør (
787:
1004:
I think the argument is that provided the catalogue is independent and reliable, its perfectly usable. Perhaps citing the policy which discounts this source?
901:
942:
as suggested. This is t not necessarily a major work, and much of the coverage seems to be about the visitor center, of which this is only a part.
319:, thanks for the suggestion. I believe that a separate article is preferable, however. The article as it stands contains parts relevant to both the
187:
154:
893:
498:
89:
17:
408:. It is a sculpture of the famous helmet and not in itself notable, the refs all relate to the actual helmet and not the sculpture.
148:
1144:
1107:
1089:
1066:
1052:
1041:
1023:
1013:
995:
980:
970:
953:
930:
868:
843:
817:
799:
767:
706:
684:
665:
629:
611:
594:
574:
557:
520:
506:
492:
478:
457:
438:
417:
397:
382:
366:
340:
307:
281:
271:
230:
212:
67:
144:
804:
I am under the impression the creator is most notable for this piece, therefore I have reinstated my previous version of the
553:
692:, does the new section "Themes" address your concerns? It addresses the sculpture in a way that could not be covered in the
1073:
81:
73:
1028:
You really need to expand on that, the clear point is that all independent reliable sources count towards notability per
254:, terming this a "local public artworks catalogue", when in fact the sculpture is given detailed coverage there. Pinging
194:
429:, five references relate directly to the sculpture: Ipswich Star 2002, Cocke 2009, Cocke 2013, and Axle Arts 2015a/b. --
242:) that received press coverage both when unveiled and subsequently, and that 100,000 people walk underneath every year.
1163:
40:
1103:
1062:
1037:
1009:
813:
303:
762:
I am putting back the warning and I am going to nominate the article for deletion, so others can weigh in. – Editør (
759:
16. Bath
Contemporary: mentions the artwork once in a list, but no significant coverage that can establish notability
926:
839:
702:
625:
474:
434:
336:
267:
255:
160:
864:
756:
15. ArtParkS: mentions the artwork once in a list, but no significant coverage that can establish notability
620:, any reason why Cocke 2013, and the various contemporary sources about its installation, are not enough? --
1099:
1058:
1033:
1005:
881:
834:
seems more like an attempt to prove a point about this sculpture than a critique of Kirby's notability. --
809:
723:
4. Ipswich Star 2002: local newspaper, discusses the artwork, but alone not enough to establish notability
316:
299:
1159:
1140:
36:
717:
2. Cocke 2013: catalogue of local public artworks, does not establish notability of any single artwork
714:
1. Cocke 2009: catalogue of local public artworks, does not establish notability of any single artwork
1085:
1048:
1019:
991:
976:
966:
922:
835:
763:
698:
680:
661:
621:
607:
570:
502:
470:
430:
394:
379:
362:
332:
277:
263:
226:
208:
180:
897:
877:
860:
711:
Among the cited sources I see no improvement in terms of establishing the sculpture's notability:
689:
617:
547:
328:
243:
640:
2: catalogue of all public sculptures, does not establish notability of any particular sculpture
637:
1: catalogue of all public sculptures, does not establish notability of any particular sculpture
465:, Cocke 2009 contains two detailed pages about the helmet. I'm happy to email it to you if you
913:
466:
246:'s description above also glosses over the sculpture's published in a 2009 book on artwork in
222:
62:
52:. There is a clear consensus against deletion; the discussion on whether or not to merge with
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1158:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1136:
298:
to see how it looked. Note I undid my edit since there is no current consensus for a merge.
1029:
204:
921:
waiting for a consensus to merge (in lieu of that consensus, I have reverted the edit). --
795:
590:
516:
488:
453:
413:
888:
is Kirby's most notable sculpture; I'm sure that articles could be written about others (
962:
912:), but—as someone interested in Anglo-Saxon helmets, and as a major contributor to the
646:
4: local newspaper, discusses the artwork, but alone not enough to establish notability
949:
905:
543:
909:
259:
57:
119:
643:
3: sales catalogue, not independent of the artist, does not establish notability
606:
The notability of this artwork is not evident from the cited sources. — Editør (
1132:
1095:
1081:
1077:
856:
831:
805:
791:
693:
657:
586:
512:
484:
462:
449:
426:
409:
358:
354:
324:
320:
291:
239:
53:
732:
7. Architects' Journal 2000: published 2 years before the artwork was made
511:
I have copied that information below - it is relevant to this discussion.
944:
741:
10. Axle Arts 2015b: gallery catalogue, not indenpendent from the author
483:
I wouldn't disagree with what you've said but think the refs are weak.
251:
247:
786:. I have separately listed for deletion the creator of this work, see
750:
13. Bruce-Mitford 1972: published 30 years before the artwork was made
1076:
should be deleted, after some of the content might be merged into
975:
Obviously merging would require some copyediting first. — Editør (
720:
3. Axle Arts 2015a: gallery tweet, not independent from the author
238:(as article's author): It's a big artwork by an important artist (
747:
12. Williams 1992: published 10 years before the artwork was made
1152:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
916:
article—I just happened to find this one interesting. Merging
295:
115:
111:
107:
1072:
have significant coverage of the artwork. The article
735:
8. Dawson 2002: undetermined, because I have no access
179:
1094:My prefered option is probably still to merge with
193:
830:is notable by itself—but the proposed deletion of
376:list of Architecture-related deletion discussions
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1166:). No further edits should be made to this page.
788:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Rick Kirby
567:list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions
565:Note: This discussion has been included in the
389:Note: This discussion has been included in the
374:Note: This discussion has been included in the
738:9. Kennedy 2002: does not mention the sculpture
729:6. National Trust: does not mention the artwork
726:5. Worsley 2003: does not mention the artwork
499:Talk:Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)#Notability
8:
391:list of England-related deletion discussions
1135:, not an independently notable work of art.
564:
388:
373:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
262:, who have previously weighed in. --
542:as fulfils GNG per Usernameunique
24:
652:6: does not mention the sculpture
649:5: does not mention the sculpture
808:article where they were merged.
221:— Note this is not the article
497:See also the discussion here:
1:
1108:21:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
1090:21:20, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
1074:Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)
1067:12:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
1053:11:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
1042:00:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
1024:23:47, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
1014:16:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
996:15:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
981:14:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
971:14:33, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
954:23:59, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
931:23:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
869:11:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
844:22:42, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
818:22:25, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
800:22:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
768:19:55, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
707:21:18, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
595:09:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
575:23:02, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
558:19:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
521:09:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
507:22:58, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
493:19:09, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
479:19:02, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
458:18:56, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
439:18:42, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
418:18:39, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
398:03:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
383:03:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
367:22:51, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
341:22:24, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
308:21:13, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
282:23:05, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
272:20:25, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
231:20:18, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
213:20:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
82:Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)
74:Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)
685:09:20, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
666:11:09, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
630:22:33, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
612:20:19, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
1183:
56:can continue elsewhere. –
1145:20:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
753:14. Williams 1992: see 12
294:article, you can examine
68:13:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1155:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
349:I would also support a
1082:Sutton Hoo#Exhibition
1057:Ok that makes sense.
884:, I don't think that
744:11. Cocke 2013: see 2
359:Sutton Hoo#Exhibition
634:For each reference:
256:Serial Number 54129
1100:Prince of Thieves
1059:Prince of Thieves
1034:Prince of Thieves
1006:Prince of Thieves
918:Sutton Hoo Helmet
914:Sutton Hoo helmet
886:Sutton Hoo Helmet
882:Prince of Thieves
828:Sutton Hoo Helmet
810:Prince of Thieves
577:
400:
385:
323:article, and the
317:Prince of Thieves
300:Prince of Thieves
223:Sutton Hoo helmet
66:
1174:
1157:
892:, for instance:
198:
197:
183:
135:
123:
105:
60:
34:
1182:
1181:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1164:deletion review
1153:
780:
604:
140:
131:
96:
80:
77:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1180:
1178:
1169:
1168:
1148:
1147:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
999:
998:
985:
984:
983:
956:
936:
935:
934:
933:
923:Usernameunique
872:
871:
849:
848:
847:
846:
836:Usernameunique
821:
820:
802:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
760:
757:
754:
751:
748:
745:
742:
739:
736:
733:
730:
727:
724:
721:
718:
715:
712:
699:Usernameunique
671:
670:
669:
668:
653:
650:
647:
644:
641:
638:
635:
622:Usernameunique
603:
600:
599:
598:
597:
579:
578:
561:
560:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
471:Usernameunique
467:send me a line
442:
441:
431:Usernameunique
421:
420:
402:
401:
386:
370:
369:
346:
345:
344:
343:
333:Usernameunique
311:
310:
287:
286:
285:
284:
264:Usernameunique
233:
201:
200:
137:
76:
71:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1179:
1167:
1165:
1161:
1156:
1150:
1149:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1130:
1127:
1126:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1050:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1021:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1003:
1002:
1001:
1000:
997:
993:
989:
986:
982:
978:
974:
973:
972:
968:
964:
960:
957:
955:
951:
947:
946:
941:
938:
937:
932:
928:
924:
919:
915:
911:
907:
903:
899:
895:
891:
887:
883:
879:
878:Colapeninsula
876:
875:
874:
873:
870:
866:
862:
861:Colapeninsula
858:
854:
851:
850:
845:
841:
837:
833:
829:
825:
824:
823:
822:
819:
815:
811:
807:
803:
801:
797:
793:
789:
785:
782:
781:
769:
765:
761:
758:
755:
752:
749:
746:
743:
740:
737:
734:
731:
728:
725:
722:
719:
716:
713:
710:
709:
708:
704:
700:
695:
691:
688:
687:
686:
682:
677:
676:
675:
674:
673:
672:
667:
663:
659:
654:
651:
648:
645:
642:
639:
636:
633:
632:
631:
627:
623:
619:
616:
615:
614:
613:
609:
601:
596:
592:
588:
584:
581:
580:
576:
572:
568:
563:
562:
559:
555:
552:
549:
545:
541:
538:
537:
522:
518:
514:
510:
509:
508:
504:
500:
496:
495:
494:
490:
486:
482:
481:
480:
476:
472:
468:
464:
461:
460:
459:
455:
451:
446:
445:
444:
443:
440:
436:
432:
428:
425:
424:
423:
422:
419:
415:
411:
407:
404:
403:
399:
396:
392:
387:
384:
381:
377:
372:
371:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
347:
342:
338:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
315:
314:
313:
312:
309:
305:
301:
297:
293:
289:
288:
283:
279:
275:
274:
273:
269:
265:
261:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
237:
234:
232:
228:
224:
220:
217:
216:
215:
214:
210:
206:
196:
192:
189:
186:
182:
178:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
146:
143:
142:Find sources:
138:
134:
130:
127:
121:
117:
113:
109:
104:
100:
95:
91:
87:
83:
79:
78:
75:
72:
70:
69:
64:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1154:
1151:
1128:
1084:. — Editør (
987:
958:
943:
939:
917:
889:
885:
852:
827:
783:
660:? — Editør (
605:
582:
550:
539:
501:. – Editør (
405:
361:. — Editør (
353:with either
350:
235:
225:. – Editør (
218:
202:
190:
184:
176:
169:
163:
157:
151:
141:
128:
49:
47:
31:
28:
1137:E.M.Gregory
167:free images
1133:Rick Kirby
1096:Rick Kirby
1078:Rick Kirby
857:Rick Kirby
832:Rick Kirby
806:Rick Kirby
694:Sutton Hoo
658:Sutton Hoo
602:Notability
569:. Editør (
355:Rick Kirby
325:Rick Kirby
321:Sutton Hoo
292:Rick Kirby
240:Rick Kirby
54:Rick Kirby
1160:talk page
963:Ericoides
544:Cas Liber
327:article;
296:this diff
37:talk page
1162:or in a
1129:Redirect
554:contribs
395:MT Train
380:MT Train
126:View log
39:or in a
988:Comment
784:Comment
583:Comment
260:Yoninah
252:Suffolk
248:Norfolk
219:Comment
173:WPÂ refs
161:scholar
99:protect
94:history
1030:WP:GNG
940:Merge
690:Editør
618:Editør
406:Delete
329:Editør
244:Editør
205:WP:GNG
203:Fails
145:Google
103:delete
950:talk
890:Hands
853:Merge
792:Szzuk
587:Szzuk
513:Szzuk
485:Szzuk
463:Szzuk
450:Szzuk
427:Szzuk
410:Szzuk
351:merge
188:JSTOR
149:books
133:Stats
120:views
112:watch
108:links
16:<
1141:talk
1104:talk
1086:talk
1063:talk
1049:talk
1038:talk
1020:talk
1010:talk
992:talk
977:talk
967:talk
959:Keep
927:talk
880:and
865:talk
840:talk
814:talk
796:talk
764:talk
703:talk
681:talk
662:talk
626:talk
608:talk
591:talk
571:talk
548:talk
540:Keep
517:talk
503:talk
489:talk
475:talk
454:talk
435:talk
414:talk
363:talk
337:talk
304:talk
278:talk
268:talk
258:and
250:and
236:Keep
227:talk
209:talk
181:FENS
155:news
116:logs
90:talk
86:edit
63:talk
50:keep
1131:to
1080:or
945:DGG
855:to
357:or
195:TWL
124:– (
58:Joe
1143:)
1106:)
1098:.
1088:)
1065:)
1051:)
1040:)
1032:.
1022:)
1012:)
994:)
979:)
969:)
952:)
929:)
908:,
904:,
900:,
896:,
867:)
842:)
816:)
798:)
790:.
766:)
705:)
697:--
683:)
664:)
628:)
610:)
593:)
573:)
556:)
519:)
505:)
491:)
477:)
456:)
437:)
416:)
393:.
378:.
365:)
339:)
306:)
280:)
270:)
229:)
211:)
175:)
118:|
114:|
110:|
106:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
1139:(
1102:(
1061:(
1047:(
1036:(
1008:(
965:(
948:(
925:(
910:5
906:4
902:3
898:2
894:1
863:(
838:(
812:(
794:(
701:(
679:(
624:(
589:(
551:·
546:(
515:(
487:(
473:(
452:(
433:(
412:(
335:(
302:(
266:(
199:)
191:·
185:·
177:·
170:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
147:(
139:(
136:)
129:·
122:)
84:(
65:)
61:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.