Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Astrid Beckmann


 * 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 speedy keep per WP:SNOW and WP:SKCRIT #1. An argument for deletion was not advanced and no other parties have recommended that the article be deleted or redirected, thus qualifying for the latter. The SandDoctor Talk 07:57, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Astrid Beckmann

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A german language page exists for this person which reads like a long cv. The long cv has been transposed into English with no verifiable 3rd party sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hangulrover69 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. I did not find significant research contributions but as head of a university she passes WP:PROF. Looking like a cv is a reason for cleanup, not deletion, and in any case this looks more like an encyclopedia article than a cv to me (it is neutrally written, in prose rather than merely being a bulleted list of postings and accomplishments). —David Eppstein (talk) 18:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Before nominating it for deletion, the nominator also removed a lot of content from the article including a photo of its subject and eight of its footnotes. The pre-removal version can be found here. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:56, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - subject meets the notability criteria for an academic. If the style of writing is an issue ("reads like a CV" for example) then that's an issue of editing/writing style, not an issue of whether the article belongs in the encyclopedia. MurielMary (talk) 08:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: cleanup may be needed, but the subject passes WP:NACADEMIC as the former rector of a major institution. — MarkH21talk 09:25, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - article needs improving not deleting Spiderone  23:14, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as WP:DINC. Noted that nom seems to be a fairly new account, but doesn't affect my !vote. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:PROF. The prose could use editing for tone and flow, but it is prose, not a list like an actual CV would provide &mdash; and that's a matter for cleanup rather than deletion anyway. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 20:53, 7 November 2020 (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.