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.
Keep. Subject is clearly notable based on sources present. The article needs some thinning and adjustments in its tone to avoid the sense that it is purely promotional, but it has value and should be kept (and has been here since 2011). DwpaulTalk 02:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Note See also
Buck House NYC. I might support a merge of these two articles, but that is, of course, a different conversation. DwpaulTalk 03:08, 19 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge with
Buck House NYC. The SPA contribs for the article show that she was/is the proprietor of this gallery, and there are sources out there for both her and her eponymous gallery:
[1],
[2],
[3]. A significant part of the content of both articles is an exhibition list, which can be trimmed and the article be rewritten to cover both topics with an appropriate redirect.
Philg88 ♦
talk 04:55, 19 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
NorthAmerica1000 04:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
NorthAmerica1000 21:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
MergeBuck House NYC here. Two articles, each fairly short and with a great deal of overlap. But there are some sources on her. -
Colapeninsula (
talk) 15:56, 7 July 2014 (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.