Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronald J. Clarke

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 (non-admin closure) — Caknuck 05:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald J. Clarke

Not sufficiently notable in his own right to deserve a bio page. It's enough that he is noted as the discoverer in the Little Foot article. Hux 10:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My goodness! what do you have against south african scientists? first me then Ron Clarke? I think you may be a bit biased! I could certainly add enough info. on this page to show that he is notable, but I am afraid it might appear as self promotion!Profberger 11:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Profberger: Please remain civil. Wikipedia is an inherently interconnected resource - I found this page via your autobiographical article. I assure you that I hold no bias here. I'm simply a disinterested party doing some housecleaning. Also, if you were to add info about Mr. Clarke to the page then it would not constitute self-promotion since you'd be writing about someone else. If the consensus is to keep the article then your input would certainly be worthwhile, provided it is encyclopedic in nature. -- Hux 13:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He is notable primarily for his discovery, but that is no reason to delete the page. Recurring dreams 11:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable paleoanthropologist credited with a significant discovery. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLP1E. There does not appear to be enough information publically available to write a proper biographical article about him. That alone makes this deletable. -- Kesh
Keep and expand Very notable. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 06:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added a key accessible reference on his most important discovery. He is also responsible for another major discovery as reported in the article, and participated in yet a third, which I have just added. Scientists are notable for their work. DGG 06:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have attached a list of references to articles etc. by independant sources on work by Ron Clarke other than for Little Foot to establish notability. Disclosure: As may be noted in the content of the Clarke page _ I am accussed of "firing" Prof. Clarke (not technically correct - he was retrenched - nevertheless this may be semantics). It is therefore innapropriate that I edit his page as there could be a percieved conflict of interest so I'll attach these references for others to use if Keep is decided upon:

[fox]

[New Scientist]

[Nature article]

[Nat. Geo.]

[laetoli footprints]
[dating of little foot]
[numerous articles on age of Little Foot which was internationally debated]
[Little foot]
[reconstructing sk 847]

Profberger 08:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —David Eppstein 06:33, 5 July 2007 (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.