Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aram Yengoyan

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 of the debate was keep. W.marsh 05:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aram Yengoyan[edit]

delete grandfather vanity. Melaen 12:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. PJM 12:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Vanity. *drew 12:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Professor who has published many books [1]. I removed the "grandfather" vanity paragraph. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-02-03 12:27Z
Keep per Quarl, notable published professor. Proto||type 15:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I wonder if you actually looked at those books. The most notable one, he just wrote a foreword for. The rest appear to be stuff put out by the university that aren't even books, but just random publishings. Certainly nothing above and beyond the average professor. Peyna 15:46, 3 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]
- Withdrawing my vote which was based solely on the publishing aspect, as other claims to notability have come forth. Peyna 17:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. If the American Anthropological Association says he deserves special recognition [2], he's notable. Monicasdude 16:36, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Ardenn 20:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Received recognition from the American Anthropological Association. 161 Google scholar results [3]. Capitalistroadster 22:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - and expand No Guru 00:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. I knew Aram when he was at Michigan. He is a well known and widely loved anthropologist. The bulk of his career came before the web, so it's no surprise he's not well represented on google, but he is notable, in my opinion. This stub needs expansion, not deletion. —rodii 03:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, especially per Monicasdude. Turnstep 17:58, 5 February 2006 (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.