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 Keep. Michig (talk) 07:27, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tjebbe van Tijen

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can find no references to Tjebbe van Tijen in the media that would support notability. His name arises quite frequently in the European press and, to a lesser extent, the US press but always as the attributed photographer for an image. These articles giving him photo credit are never about him Fiachra10003 (talk) 21:55, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Largoplazo, you have had some involvement with this article, so you may have researched notability previously. Fiachra10003 (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep There are many mentions of him in Google Book search. I don't have time to look at them in detail, few are full view, some are not english, but things that stand out are "founded the (short lived) Research Center Art Technology and Society in Amsterdam" - "In Amsterdam, the archives of whoever ventures into the field of politics and culture will sooner or later end up with Tjebbe van Tijen. For many people he is the embodiment of storage mania." - "Artists were early adopters of the web, and by 1999, when the web was a mere six-year-old, curator Tjebbe van Tijen was already ..." - Also, this looks like reliable source. Derek Andrews (talk) 00:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:42, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:42, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also Weak Keep. He is in Christiane Paul's Digital Art, which counts for something. I see enough other mentions in Gbooks to say he is interesting and he exists and is maybe a small part of art history based on the sources.104.163.147.121 (talk) 10:36, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep going with the trend here... He has been very active for a very long time (see exhibitions here [1]) and it seems like he mostly collaborates with others, or works under project names, which is why a straight up google/db search isn't going to get the goods. Theredproject (talk) 21:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep 125 articles on Google scholar some of which he has written, other discussing his work, though not sure he is the actual subject of any of them. Facitva brings up no articles about him. Borderline keep. Deathlibrarian (talk) 07:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Do have some coverage, even though might not be as strong coverage as we wish to for his contribution is pre internet time - see here [2] and [3]. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:40, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I felt like "weak delete" after looking at web coverage, and then found enough more at Google Books to end up in "keep" territory, based not only on significant coverage (of which there is little on the web) but also what's said in various sound sources about his significance. Before I got to Google Books, I found him cited extensively and mentioned once in the text of this book, I found two sources here and here focusing on a particular graphic he created, and bona fide significant coverage in this article devoted to him. At Google Books I quickly came across this, describing him as ubiquitous in the field of Amsterdam culture and politics, this stating that "For many, Tjebbe van Tijen embodies the Will to Archive, and this, declaring that "his ideas founded the largest counter-movement the Netherlands ever has experienced against city planning. The resistance eventually led to riots ...". He gets around in a variety of fields, and enough diverse, independent sources highlight the impact that he has had that I feel the article qualifies to remain. However, the article ought to be expanded to reflect all of this. Largoplazo (talk) 11:15, 29 March 2018 (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.