Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G. A. den Hartogh

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) Tim Song (talk) 01:03, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

G. A. den Hartogh[edit]

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

This BLP article has remained unsourced for three years and does not appear to meet WP:PROF as currently written. Jezebel'sPonyo ^shhh 18:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless sourced, in which case probably delete as non notable.--Scott Mac (Doc) 18:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A minor but notable Dutch academic and a participant in numerous bioethics debates. Unfortunately, much of the media reportage is in Dutch, but that shouldn't disqualify him from notability. I added several references and additional material. MiRroar (talk) 17:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. He has few citations in Google scholar but I think this is just one of those areas that GS covers badly: he's much better represented in Google books, from which he appears to be well respected both in the research philosophy community and in the popular (Dutch) press. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as nominator, I am satisfied with the sources that have been added to the article and would now consider it a weak keep. Jezebel'sPonyo ^shhh 18:48, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to the above, in 2009 a festchrift in honor of his retirement was published[1]. I have added a ref to the article. Passes WP:PROF. Nsk92 (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. festschrift gives clear pass. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:39, 11 February 2010 (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.