Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeynep Ergun (2nd nomination)

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. The "delete" opinions do not address what seems to be the moderately substantial media coverage found by Phil Bridger. Sandstein 07:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Zeynep Ergun[edit]

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

There are hundreds of thousands of professors with publications all over the world. This article doesn't cite why is it this one in particular worthy of being mentioned in an encyclopaedia.--Rafy talk 19:41, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:AUTHOR with reviews such as [1], [2] and [3]. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:15, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It is not made clear in the article that this article is about a notable feminist author. Nor is there any emphasis on this attribute. The article emphasises that this individual is a university professor without notable qualification. Nipsonanomhmata ^(Talk) 00:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione _.......^{Leave a message} 06:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I am not entirely sure the reviews ammout to significance except in a local context--for wp:prof, it's established that the context is international. But I am certainly puzzled about the argument above that the article should be deleted because if needs expansion to give a fuller context--on the basis of the argument as it stands, it's an argument for keeping because it amounts to an argument that the subject is more notable than the present article indicates. DGG ( talk ) 06:58, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Zero impact on scholarship as judged by GS, which does index Turkish pages. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:21, 22 April 2011 (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.