Talk:Art versus Nonart: Art out of Mind

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 September 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	It is requested that a picture or pictures be included in this article to improve its quality.

Philosophy: Literature / Aesthetics / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Aesthetics
	Contemporary philosophy

This is an important book, published by one of the best publishers in the work and translated. What do you expect more ? --Yoavd (talk) 06:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant and reliable sources that write about the book and prove that it is a notable book. The Banner talk 11:48, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the academic sources that takes his theory and use it are:

Mureika, J. R., G. C. Cupchik, and C. C. Dyer. "Multifractal fingerprints in the visual arts." Leonardo 37.1 (2004): 53-56.‏
Mureika, J. R., C. C. Dyer, and G. C. Cupchik. "Multifractal structure in nonrepresentational art." Physical Review E 72.4 (2005): 046101.‏
Priday, Hamilton. Seizing the Essence Hamilton Priday. 2008.
Alexenberg, Mel. The Future of Art in a Postdigital Age: From Hellenistic to Hebraic Consciousness (Bristol and Chicago: Intellect Books/University of Chicago Press, 2011). Tzahy (talk) 04:07, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The book like other works of this author, is quoted in many books and articles about theory and history of aesthetics, art, etc,expresses legitimate points of view and multidisciplinary paths of inquiry, even if they may be controversial, the author is an erudite theoretician of aesthetics, had a serious academic career in the domain, the book was published in one of the most important academical publishing houses, aroused interest in other countries and was translated, etc.Ewan2 (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As above, Professor Tsion Avital is a known writer in Israel. Ovedc (talk) 08:20, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the author is well known, does not mean that his books are notable. Notability is not inherited. So you have to prove the notability of the book. Not here, but in the article. And with reliable third party sources. The Banner talk 08:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John A. Walker, one of the most important art critics wrote about the book: "If Avital's diagnosis of art's illness and his proposed cure are correct, then this is a highly important volume." (The Art Book 25-26, Volume 12 Issue 2, May 2005) Tzahy (talk) 20:54, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

-Scholar google search for the author gives 51 hits.

- Scholar google search for the book gives 21 hits (straight 18 + 3 for "non art" rather than "nonart").

- Those numbers are respectable and in my opinion the article should not be deleted.

- Please add your claims at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page, as I have already done. It is probably more important to list the opinions there. Ykantor (talk) 07:55, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]