implicit art

The art work / page has been deleted from Wikipedia, approximately 12 hours after its birth. But it is not dead, merely transformed – performatively un-uttered and soon to be resurrected in an/other form. Watch this space for upcoming/ongoing press and archives and interventions that are all part of Wikipedia Art as a work. In the meanwhile, my favorite fragment of the piece thus far is the performance it engendered here and here. (These will be archived elsewhere soon, under the necessary GFDL license.)

It should be duly noted that:

• Wikipedia broke their own rules in deleting this post, citing that it broke their rules, which should never be broken. The discussion that began surrounding its deletion was NOT closed, and thus the page should have been given at least 24 hours (most are given 3 to 5 days). Endorsers of the deletion claim that the ends justify the means, but rule-breaking begetting rule-breaking by the enforcers seems like a stretch for truly objective readers / editors / Wikipedians. Admitting that’s the case, fearing the “setting of a precedent” – as some express in the above links – does not make it any better; worse, in fact. Obviously, even if the Wikipedia community does not see Wikipedia Art as a “valid” intervention, they have proved it to be a necessary one (and thus valid on a much larger and more important scale).
• The Wikipedians behind the delete (and lock-down – no one can recreate the entry) also went so far as to erase the entire history of the Wikipedia Art page – there is no record of the “work” (in its initial manifestation on Wikipedia) and its transformations, other than in the debates linked to above (and a few other snippets of arguing I didn’t bother posting right now).

Poor form, gentleman. We’ll have archives and updates live on WikipediaArt.org soon.