Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gordon Klein

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Klein

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No evidence that Klein meets WP:NPROF. Only mainstream coverage is for the attendance policy controversy on the page, which isn't sufficient for an article per WP:ONEEVENT. Note that there are a number of Gordon Kleins on Google Scholar, at least one of which DOES appear to be notable enough for an article, but not this one. PianoDan (talk) 19:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. PianoDan (talk) 19:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I didn't find the reviews of his books that would be needed for WP:AUTHOR-based notability, and Google Scholar searches (taking into account similar names as above) didn't turn up evidence of WP:PROF. In any case this seems like a WP:COATRACK for the attendance incident, an inappropriate basis for an article on an otherwise-non-notable WP:BLP. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable academic. There are seven Gordon Kleins on Scopus. As PianoDan says, one of them may well be notable, but this one is not one of those seven. Disclosure: before tagging this page for notability on 30 January 2022, I removed a good deal of unsourced and/or trivial content; here's what it looked like before I touched it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As above. Additional info: he wrote an article for Bari Weiss's substack ([1]) in which he mentions that most of his income comes from consultancy work, so it seems much more likely that, if he were notable, the appropriate guideline would be WP:BASIC rather than a specific biography SNG. On that, he fails WP:BLP1E. -- asilvering (talk) 20:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 08:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At 23:10 yesterday User:Szmenderowiecki, a non-admin, purported to close this discussion as delete. As the deletion discussion had not reached its closing time and a non-admin cannot actually delete a page, this closure was procedurally improper. It was listed for DRV within the hour, and less than an hour after that, Szmenderowiecki undid their closure, albeit leaving the DRV signage in place and the DRV open, although a comment posted to the DRV discussion seemed to suggest that they were keeping the discussion open.
To the extent Szmenderowiecki has not agreed to withdraw the closure, I hereby, pursuant to WP:DPR#NAC, vacate their closure and reopen this AFD to close on its normal closure date, unless it be properly closed early by an admin before then. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 8 June 2022 (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.