Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Analisa Leppanen


 * 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. North America1000 02:32, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Analisa Leppanen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article gives at most one indication of significance: being one of the foremost authorities on one particular artist. Google shows little or no substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. Google Scholar shows her published works, but one has only three citations and the rest none. She doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMICS. Largoplazo (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

That is probably because you searched google for Analisa Leppanen instead of Analisa Leppanen-Guerra, the name she has published under most. Searching by Leppanen_Guerra brings back tons of articles. Billyglad (talk) 22:37, 16 July 2016 (UTC)Billyglad


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 05:06, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 05:06, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

If Leppanen is one of the foremost authorities on Joseph Cornell, as a writer and artist I would find that very significant. Probably her expertise extends to surrealism in general. If nothing else, she should make valuable contributions to any articles on Cornell and links back to her credentials would be essential for judging the weight of her opinions. Billyglad (talk) 19:03, 10 July 2016 (UTC)Billyglad
 * Is she one of the two foremost authorities or one of the 45 foremost authorities? I lean toward attributing less significance to vaguely worded claims made by people about themselves. Largoplazo (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

My thought is that to say that someone is authoritative is to say that they are a significant player in the world of scholarship, in this case Cornell scholarship. Maybe looking at the acknowledgements in this excerpt from one of her books will give us an idea of the level at which Leppanen plays. https://books.google.com/books?id=Qne_wqJfbFsC&pg=PR18&lpg=PR18&dq=joseph+cornell+scholars&source=bl&ots=TY700_GBuE&sig=EU-P1yXKNAIaHjr8XM1Ww27muE8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiU6N2svOrNAhUFQiYKHTbqAE84ChDoAQg4MAQ#v=onepage&q=joseph%20cornell%20scholars&f=false. I'd add that it's significant that she published a multi-media work (Joseph Cornell's Manual of Marvels), which included a book of essays, a partial facsimile, and a CD-ROM, on Cornell's book-object, which was the first artist's book of its kind --a groundbreaking work of scholarship that revealed Cornell's book to other scholars and the general public. And your Google search should have turned up Julie Bloom's full-page review in the New York Times (Dec. 2, 2012) and Jed Perl's glowing review in the New Republic (Dec. 5, 2012)." Billyglad (talk) 03:48, 11 July 2016 (UTC)Billyglad Also, I believe a Google search on Analisa Leppanen-Guerra the other name she has published and lectured under will turn up much more coverage than the articles you found searching just on Analisa Leppanen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billyglad (talk • contribs) 23:15, 11 July 2016 (UTC) This page is looking good this morning.Billyglad (talk) 13:05, 12 July 2016 (UTC)Billyglad  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Leppanen passes WP:AUTHOR #3 with her work as the subject of multiple reviews in reliable sources. I just added another source from Art History. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Leppanen's multi-media work, Joseph Cornell's Manual of Marvels, is clearly an original contribution to her field. Billyglad (talk) 22:42, 16 July 2016 (UTC)Billyglad It also appears that the Further Reading section of the main Joseph Cornell WP page links to Analisa Leppanen. Billyglad (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2016 (UTC)Billyglad
 * Keep, meets WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG, article has been improved and reflects this. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:16, 22 July 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.