Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Esbeck


 * 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 no consensus. W.marsh 19:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Carl Esbeck

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I don't believe this law professor's notability has been sufficiently asserted. Unless notability established, delete. --Nlu (talk) 12:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.  -- Pete.Hurd 15:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Named professor at the main state university campus in his state, has been credited with important contributions to federal law, looks notable to me. It doesn't have to explicitly say "he is notable for..." for it to be an assertion of notability. —David Eppstein 17:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per Eppstein points. Also, he is a Chair. I support WP:PROF. Tparameter 15:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete unless properly sourced and referenced i.a.w. WP:PROF and/or WP:BIO by end of this AfD Alf photoman 19:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Edeans 22:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep A full professor in a major law school holding a named chair. That means three or more successive peer-reviews by already-qualified academics. We do not need to peer-review notability nor are we qualified. Fortunately, the faculty at universities do it for us. The only evidence relevant otherwise would be a negative peer-review.
 * comment--WP:PROF I remind everyone that WP:PROF is a proposal, not guideline, not even an accepted guideline, and certainly not policy; it is still being actively discussed on its talk page, and is of no authority whatsoever. Says so right at the top, read it for yourself. DGG 00:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * In general I agree with the sentiment that the peer review he must have gone through to get to his present position must have been more thorough than anything we can do here, but I would also argue that he does clearly pass WP:PROF. Specifically, a named professorship at a major university is or should be considered to be "a notable award or honor" as in WP:PROF item 6. —David Eppstein 06:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Addhoc 13:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per above searches. Addhoc 13:31, 8 February 2007 (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.