Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Herrmann

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 no consensus. Comments indicate this is a borderline case and arguments either way aren't persuasive to me. Pigman☿ 18:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Herrmann[edit]

This article gives a lengthy account of the subject's academic career, but nowhere does it mention other sources writing about the subject, as required by WP:N. I'm sure he is an important scholar in his field, but important is not the same thing as notable.

The article was almost entirely written by User:Arno.tausch, a close professional colleague of the subject whose own article (Arno Tausch) I am also nominating for deletion. I put a {{notable}} tag on the article a month ago, and there has been no response. BlueMoonlet (t/c) 12:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —BlueMoonlet (t/c) 12:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. One should provide some external sources to justify his notability (e.g. articles about him; I do not know if citation index qualify). So far there is nothing to justify his notability.Biophys (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough encyclopedic significance to justify having his article in Wikipedia. Rsazevedo ^msg 01:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep pending a check for reviews and copyvio. Another PR job, though he is apparently a little less distinguished than Tausch. The common factor might be the publisher. 17 books, but the most widely held one has only 106 US/Canada location--in a widely studied and popular field--this may not be as mediocre as it looks because they are books that would appeal mainly in Europe, which is not covered by WorldCat. More investigation needed. Reviews must be looked for. DGG (talk) 04:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JERRY ^talk _contribs 05:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom (hadn't actually said that yet). After discussing the relevant issues with DGG, we agree that this is a borderline case, and I'm still inclined to delete. Notability for an academic is measured by the impact of his work upon his field. This is measured primarily by how widely cited his work has been, and also by various honors such as tenure or awards from major professional societies. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 04:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per DGG. Minos P. Dautrieve (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:24, 14 February 2008 (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.