Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald M. Anderson


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) 4meter4 (talk) 23:40, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Donald M. Anderson

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:NPROF and WP:SIGCOV. It's possible he passes WP:NARTIST, but I was unable to verify the claims in the article in a WP:BEFORE search. 4meter4 (talk) 15:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Dakota-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - he meets WP:NARTIST. 30-linear feet of his papers are in the Archives of American Art, and the Museum of Wisconsin Art archive, 35 linear feet of his work and papers are at the The Newberry (It is unclear if the material at the Newberry is a duplicate of the Archives of American Art, but either way, institutions don't collect these types of materials on an artist/illutrator's work if they do not have historical value. I was able to verify the collection of the Chazen Museum of Art - Netherzone (talk) 16:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Meh. If this were deleted it would be no great loss. His papers are indeed in lots of good museums, and I managed to find a book review of one his calligraphy books. Very oddly though, I didn't see any images of his work as an artist online, other than the Chazen collection above. My take is that he's a non-notable visual artist who might barely meet our notability guidelines due to the many museums that hold his personal papers. 75% of the article should be cut, as it's unsourced and full of unverified exaggeration.--- Possibly (talk) 16:59, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - I've added a second museum collection, the Museum of Wisconcin Art + three citations. Archive collections such as the Smithsonian Archives of American Art are selective and highly curated. The Newberry is nothing to sniff at either. That these two major archives have collected a total of 65 linear feet of his graphic works and papers is a significant indication of this person's importance. - Netherzone (talk) 18:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. With the excellent improvements made by Netherzone and Possibly, I think we can now safely say that criteria 4 of WP:NCREATIVE has been established. As such, I am going to withdraw this nomination. Many thanks for taking the time to participate here and improve the article itself.4meter4 (talk) 23:38, 15 June 2021 (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.