Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonio T. de Nicolás

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. Geschichte (talk) 10:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio T. de Nicolás[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Appears to fail WP:NPROF, except for this, which may be a Festschrift but looks self-published. I also found this review, but that's about it. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:00, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:00, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:00, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. GS cites just OK for elderly poet and philosopher. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. I just added 12 published reviews of 4 of his books to the article. I think that's enough for WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:38, 24 October 2020 (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.