Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Franz Anatol Wyss

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. The consensus is to keep following improvement to the article PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Franz Anatol Wyss[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searching GNews I find one relevant article about an exhibition and GBooks shows his self-published catalogues and tangential mentions but nothing to show significant impact in the sense of WP:ARTIST such as notable awards or permanent exhibition in major public galleries. The German Wikipedia article has no relevant sources or anything to suspect the :en version is likely to meet the ARTIST criteria in the near future. A freelance artist who may have many temporary exhibitions in his lifetime may not be notable in an encyclopaedic sense. Previously prodded and de-prodded without a rationale or improvement so raising for wider discussion. Fæ (talk) 10:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. -- Fæ (talk) 10:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- Fæ (talk) 10:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the article as it is doesn't deserve to be kept. But I found bio information that perhaps makes a difference swissartguide.ch, leaving to art experts to judge his awards, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 22:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, if only to make the point that 8 words is not an article. His bio does claim works in several important museum print collections (eg Berlin, Basel), but this has to be much less significant than paintings in similar collections. Another of Dr Blofeld's abandoned newborns. Who will ever expand this? Johnbod (talk) 03:58, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ask and ye shall receive dearest John. Sometimes a pretty please would go a long way instead of resorting to personal attacks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not enough to go on...Modernist (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The GBooks hits seem to indicate there's plenty of sourcing available, it's just those sources aren't in English. Edward321 (talk) 01:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep After checking a copy of the catalogue of the Gotthard Bank Collection (luckily held by the British Library), I am happy to go along with the opinion of Gotthard Bank in that they believe that Wyss is a notable post-war contemporary Swiss artist. As the nominator of this AfD this is not an automatic speedy keep, however with the additional information I have added to the article there is now some possibility of further improvement. Fæ (talk) 13:02, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Per Fae. There are not an abundance of sources online about this artist but enough I believe to meet requirements with the Gotthard source.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:32, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep expanded now and supported by the German National Library, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.