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.
Keep. I don't think he passes
WP:PROF and I'm not sure about
WP:AUTHOR but he passes
WP:GNG (with an obituary published in the Chicago Tribune and an entry in the Science Fiction Encyclopedia among other sources) and that's good enough. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 03:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)reply
PS I just added six reviews for four of his nonfiction books to the article. So
WP:AUTHOR and
WP:PROF are also back in play (well-received books and book reviews being more the currency of academic notability than high citation counts and h-indexes for this kind of subject). —
David Eppstein (
talk) 06:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep clearly notable author, and apparent would meet WP PROF as an expert in his field. DGG (
talk ) 05:41, 27 February 2015 (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.
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.
Keep. I don't think he passes
WP:PROF and I'm not sure about
WP:AUTHOR but he passes
WP:GNG (with an obituary published in the Chicago Tribune and an entry in the Science Fiction Encyclopedia among other sources) and that's good enough. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 03:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)reply
PS I just added six reviews for four of his nonfiction books to the article. So
WP:AUTHOR and
WP:PROF are also back in play (well-received books and book reviews being more the currency of academic notability than high citation counts and h-indexes for this kind of subject). —
David Eppstein (
talk) 06:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep clearly notable author, and apparent would meet WP PROF as an expert in his field. DGG (
talk ) 05:41, 27 February 2015 (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.