Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel R. Anderson
for now. I prefer, for the time being, to |assume the good faith of {{user|Zanimum}}, the experienced Wikipedia editor who has created these stubs, and should be given a chance to improve them. He hasn't edited since the 30th and I think it would have been a good idea to give him a chance to work more on these articles before nominating them (and definitely before speedying them, as was originally done). ''I also strongly disagree with this group-nomination.'' The nominator has not attempted to show that the notability of each of these individuals is in any way dependent on that of the others. They should be judged as individuals. I notice, for instance, that some of these have hits on Amazon, others do not
— User:Uppland, 13:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:FAITH (Wikipedia:Assume good faith)