Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anncharlott Eschmann


 * 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) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Anncharlott Eschmann

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't appear to meet WP:PROF or WP:GNG. Has been in CAT:NN for 12 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 21:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment "head of the New Delhi branch of Heidelberg's South Asia Institute" sounds promising? Furius (talk) 09:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete The "head" of a universitiy's outreach/external study program in another place is not at all close to meeting any actual criteria of professor notability, and nothing about her or her work meets any academic notability. The sources clearly and completely fail GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That's just not what the South Asia Institute is - it's a degree-granting academic institution under Heidelberg's umbrella, with multiple faculties and its own academic chairs, so closer to something like the American School of Classical Studies in Athens. She also appears in Stache-Rosen, German Indologists. Biographies of scholars in Indian studies writing in German; with a summary on Indology in German speaking countries. 1981, 2nd ed. rev. by A. Stache-Weiske. (1990) pp. 131ff. and there is probably more information in (but I don't have access to) Tripathi, Gaya Charan & Kulke, Hermann, Religion and society in eastern India : Eschmann memorial lectures (1994), which honoured her posthumously. These factors incline me to keep. Furius (talk) 01:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per Furius. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. She is the main editor of the well-cited collection The Cult of Jagannath (review: ) and her book Das Religiöse Geschichtsbilt Der Azteken has two reviews . By itself that would only be enough to give her a very weak case for WP:AUTHOR, but I think it adds to the case for notability already made on different grounds by Furius. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 18:54, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep-- as per David Eppstein, yet article needs references.-- Melaleuca alternifolia  |  talk  19:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, meets WP:AUTHOR, albeit barely.Jackattack1597 (talk) 23:26, 30 August 2021 (UTC)


 * 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.