This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the science and academia work group. Germany Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Philosophy: Philosophers Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophers

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 December 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

This article contains a translation of Walter Ehrlich from de.wikipedia.

I have restored the {{unreferenced}} tag because the article is unreferenced. - Mdsummermsw ( talk) 16:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC) reply

That tag was already present, and I didn't remove it. I'm fine with it being in the article. – sgeureka ^t•c 16:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC) reply

I have restored the {{orphan}} tag because the article is an orphan. - Mdsummermsw ( talk) 16:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC) reply

It is usual for non-contemporary philosopher articles to be orphaned. I added the tag several months ago when notability was not established, but now that it is established, it doesn't matter anymore that he is ophaned (IMO). But why did you restore the {{ notability}} tag? Him having an article on the de:wikipedia and having a long list of works surely establishes notability? (I don't know this philosopher, I'm just interested in this article because it is part of WP:SU where I once did much cleanup work.) – sgeureka ^t•c 16:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC) reply

I can easily imagine the editors at de:wikipedia saying, in German, he's listed on en:wikipedia, so he must be notable... That's why having a listing in a wiki setting is not an indication of WP:NOTABILITY. How many books or articles one publishes is likewise not a criteria. Having multiple, third-party, reliable sources about the subject would do the trick, but there are zero sources. - Mdsummermsw ( talk) 17:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC) reply

I agree, but what's the difference with the other hundreds (thousands?) of people stubs that User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg (i.e. SU) created that, in time, could, can and will establish notability? Also, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter Ehrlich. I am just not in favor of template madness (but I'll let this issue go as I won't improve the article to make the tags unjustified). – sgeureka ^t•c 17:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC) reply