Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Dempster

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The result was withdrawn. ✗plicit 23:43, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Dempster[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)

I found no significant coverage for this professor. Fails WP:PROF. SL93 (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Christianity, and Ontario. SL93 (talk) 22:30, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:PROF #5 as holding a named chair, but also #1: 290 cites for his major book in this field demonstrates "significant impact in their scholarly discipline". St Anselm (talk) 00:00, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As per what I thought and David Eppstein said in the edit history for #5, it seems that it would matter if he was full level and not an associate professor. I would like more opinions if cites for one book is all we're going by for notability. SL93 (talk) 00:05, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I don't think named associate professorships count towards #C5. This doesn't affect the argument based on #C1, of course. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:01, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the named chair was a five year appointment; he was succeeded by Keith Bodner. Dempster became a full professor and retired last year. He was made professor emeritus, itself a significant achievement, apparently.[1] St Anselm (talk) 05:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: regarding WP:PROF #1, Paul R. House's essay "God’s Design and Postmodernism: Recent Approaches to Old Testament Theology" has a section on Dempster.[2] St Anselm (talk) 06:08, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the subject does not pass WP:PROF#C5, but he may well pass other notability criteria. There are reviews of his work at [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:31, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 00:19, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as he became a full professor and his book has multiple reviews in reliable sources as identified above so passes WP:PROF im ny view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:20, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw: I withdraw based on the reviews. SL93 (talk) 01:32, 22 April 2022 (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.