Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Himelblau

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 keep. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010(talk) 15:06, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Himelblau

Jack Himelblau (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)

No evidence of meeting

WP:GNG, despite being tagged for over 6 years. Boleyn (talk) 10:24, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete, fails
WP:NOTABLE.--Smerus (talk) 13:08, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I noticed that DGG has added some reviews to the article and came across this AfD as a result. The recently added reviews appear to constitute at least four full-length reviews of the the subject's works in academic sources, as a result, WP:AUTHOR 3 is met. --j⚛e deckertalk 21:09, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keepIt technically meets the requirements for NAUTHOR. More impressionistically, it seems to me that he is not really an expert in any one thing in particular--his works seems to each be on a separate subject entirely, and I would be reluctant to claim notability by WP:PROF. This is right at the boundary where any decision makes sense. Since he may yet become more notable, and the article is not in anyway harmful, I see no real reason to delete it. DGG ( talk ) 22:50, 27 August 2014 (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.