Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arnold H. Green

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. Nakon 21:39, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold H. Green

Arnold H. Green (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Person fails to meet

• Keep To claim there were no sources at the time of nomination is a major exaggeration. The article cited an LA Times article that made significant mention of Green. I have added others. His articles have clearly had influence.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • CMT - One article which mentions him in passing dose not make him notable per
    WP:NACADEMICS. To be notable he must have "made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources". and "received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level." The LA Times article only mentions in one paragraph that he is a a history professor at BYU and he wrote a 2001 essay on Muslims and Mormons.--- ARTEST4ECHO^(Talk) 15:58, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- The number of publications mentioned in the article does not inspire me with confidence, but I am reluctant to vote on LDS issues. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:20, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment This article should likely be moved to Draft space if there is work planned on it. If not count me as a Delete. Jerodlycett (talk) 01:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete with allowance that it can be recreated in Draft space. Jerodlycett (talk) 19:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I looked at the LA Times article and I would not call its mention of Green significant. There were a few sentences (so it's not outright trivial either), but the article was not about Green. He and his work were only briefly mentioned. Several such pieces would "add up", but I don't think one is enough. Agricola44 (talk) 15:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]
• Keep Inadequate article for notable professor. He's been professor and chair of the history department at a major research university, and that indicates his peers in the academic world consider human expert in his field. His The Tunisian Ulama 1873-1915: Social Structure and Response to Ideological Currents. Leiden: Brill, 1978. by the major europeanacademic publisher in the field is in almost 200 libraries,significant for this subject. It's even been translated into Arabic as ‏العلماء التونسيون /‏ (al-ʻUlamāʼ al-Tūnisīyūn) DGG ( talk ) 03:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per logic by User:DGG. @Rob talk 17:35, 3 April 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.