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. Enough reviews of enough different books to pass
WP:AUTHOR, completely unrelated to any single-event controversy. The article should not cover up his history as a Holocaust denier as it now does, of course, but being a Holocaust denier doesn't prevent being notable in other ways. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
20:12, 21 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete or at least
WP:TNT. This BLP is one of the most tendentious I have seen on Wikipedia. It contains bombastic bloat, unsourced claims, commercial spam and seems to be used as a battleground for agendas both for and against the subject. I suggest that contributors to this AFD check how many of the claims made in the BLP can be verified by the sources given. A careful look at the subject's GS profile
[1] raises doubts that the number of citations claimed there is realistic. There should be no place in Wikipedia for a BLP like this. The best I can suggest is delete without prejudice to recreating a
WP:TNTed stub.
Xxanthippe (
talk)
02:31, 22 December 2019 (UTC).reply
Keep but prune -- Elements of this wreak of autobiography (which WP discourages). He appears to be a professor in the Commonwealth sense, which would make him notable, and he clearly has enough publications for that. However, I would prefer to see less detail about his training and work in progress. That level of detail belongs (if anywhere) on a personal webpage at his university or alma mater.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
12:33, 27 December 2019 (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.