- 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 delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:59, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Arnd Bernaerts
- Arnd Bernaerts ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Reason Ice Czar ( talk) 23:27, 22 November 2015 (UTC) General notability https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GNG#General_notability_guideline Original research https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. FuriouslySerene ( talk) 23:13, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 20:24, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 20:24, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Although he is a prolific writer, his work is rarely cited, according to Google Scholar. I have been unable to find significant coverage of him in reliable, independent sources. As always, I am willing to reconsider if good sources come to light. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:06, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - as pointed out by Cullen328, the author is prolific, but that does not translate into notability. His most heavily cited work only has 31 cites, the rest are in single digits. Other searches did not turn up enough to show they meet notability criteria. Onel5969 TT me 12:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:59, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Arnd Bernaerts
- Arnd Bernaerts ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Reason Ice Czar ( talk) 23:27, 22 November 2015 (UTC) General notability https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GNG#General_notability_guideline Original research https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. FuriouslySerene ( talk) 23:13, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 20:24, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 20:24, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Although he is a prolific writer, his work is rarely cited, according to Google Scholar. I have been unable to find significant coverage of him in reliable, independent sources. As always, I am willing to reconsider if good sources come to light. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:06, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - as pointed out by Cullen328, the author is prolific, but that does not translate into notability. His most heavily cited work only has 31 cites, the rest are in single digits. Other searches did not turn up enough to show they meet notability criteria. Onel5969 TT me 12:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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.