Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anne Abgott


 * 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. No strong opinions in the discussion, but no keeps, even weak keeps, either, all voters are in good standing, and the arguments are pretty much elaborate, so I guess we should delete the article. No prejudice against recreation if better/more sources have been found.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Anne Abgott

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to fail WP:ARTIST. I could, of course, be wrong. Lovely art though! SarahStierch (talk) 02:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. Sourcing is not great though this source says: "one of the premiere watercolor artists in the country and served as the 2006 president of the Florida Watercolor Society—the largest such guild in the country." Not sure how reliable "Mountain Times" is for such pronouncement but there it is. Otherwise not really finding much beyond local Florida pieces. Update: was in Best of Watercolor, 2010. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 08:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment From Proquest, the article is "MUDDY COLORS ARE THE ENEMY OF EVERY WATERCOLORIST, BUT ANNE ABGOTT HAS DEVELOPED WAYS OF KEEPING MUD AT BAY AND CREATING VIBRANT COLORS" by Price, Linda S. Watercolor10.39 (Summer 2004): 104-113. Proquest ID212416001 :I've read it --it is predominantly a very detailed article about her technique, and contains reproductions of all or part of about 10 works (mostly still lifes and birds) It contains no information about exhibits or museum collections. &#39;DGG (at NYPL)&#39; (talk) 19:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:54, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * She's borderline. Wow, WP:ARTIST is pretty strict, so let's look at WP:BIO. We have here a full-length feature which is about the subject (not just her work) which is what we're looking for. If it was in the LA Times she'd be in. But it's the Bradenton Times, which is online-only; Bradenton is a middling city and I gather people mostly read the Sarasota and Tampa papers. That's it for material that's much about the subject. The rest of the media isn't substantial coverage of the subject. The Mountain Times piece is typical: here's an artist, she's giving an exhibit, here's a couple-few boilerplate sentences about her. And the Mountain Times is a weekly in Boone, North Carolina. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune is a real print daily in a city I've heard of and has Wikipedia article. But the piece is just a brief announcement of an exhibit at a private studio. The Orlando Sentinal calls her "highly acclaimed" and, oddly, calls her book a "#1 best seller", which I wonder what they mean by that. But it's just a notice of a workshop, or maybe even an ad. Everything else appears to be like that, or else is in a specialized publication.


 * You could slice this two ways: She's got a feature-length interview/bio, in a real (online) publication with real editors and stuff. On top of she's mentioned in the Sarasota paper and the Orlando paper and also a bunch of other places. And she's a published author. And FWIW her stuff is good which is a positive marker for continued growth of reputation.


 * Or, she's got nothing, except basically press-release-type notices that's she's giving a workshop or an exhibit (at a small venue, not a museum or big notable gallery), except for one single article on a C-list website in some podunk small city. And WP:BIO requires "been the subject of multiple" sources. One isn't multiple. And her book is just an instruction book by an unnotable specialist publisher. Her work isn't cutting-edge so she's not likely to achieve later fame. Her awards are trivial.


 * It's a coin flip. She doesn't meet WP:BIO unless you squint a little, or WP:ANYBIO or WP:ARTIST, so on that basis it'd be slightly idiosyncratic to keep the article. Herostratus (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2013 (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.