Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Dold


 * 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 delete. Missvain (talk) 17:06, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Andrew Dold

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:ARTIST fail. Now and then I think it is important to enforce the higher standard of WP:ARTIST, as if we accept this artist is notable we are going to have thousands of articles on people who do good drawings with coloured pencils. This particular artist has has some minor success, but it is nothing to write home about as they say. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Doesn't qualify for WP:ARTIST either. Lunar Clock (talk) 18:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I looked for notability but found none. fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:N Lightburst (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete the references don't even check out. There's really nothing we could write at all. Vexations (talk) 20:49, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per failing WP:ARTIST.NotButtigieg (talk) 10:53, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - Does not pass WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:ARTIST. Netherzone (talk) 07:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NARTIST, WP:MILL, WP:V, and WP:GNG. No art in collections of major art museums or galleries. Not working and exhibiting in an "art capital". Very minor awards. Totally run of the mill. Had done nothing notable otherwise. Searches reveal different persons with similar names - one a business person c. 1880 and an orthopedist. Bearian (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The article has four citations of failed verifications, making the article's claims suspect.TH1980 (talk) 01:26, 15 January 2020 (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.