Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Wieland (2nd nomination)


 * 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)  → Call me  Razr   Nation  01:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Carl Wieland
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No third-party sources for notability. This person's claims for notability rest entirely on the website he writes for. --Pete (talk) 22:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 December 26.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 23:15, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Appears to be well-known in Australia. I found few sources, but my reach into Aussie sources is limited. Guardian Inducted into Creation Science Hall of Fame Nat'l Center for Science Ed U Chicago Historical Records of Australian Science. Most of these only mention him. There are lots of fringe sites that have quite a bit about him. I think he is notable as WP:fringe, but the article needs the full POV to be useful. LaMona (talk) 06:06, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I became aware of this AfD from the nominator's contribution list after he/she removed all of the external references from Russell Humphreys.  This nomination on a potentially controversial topic disregards WP:BEFORE and the policy WP:PRESERVE, and the only claim is easily refuted by reading the previous AfD and the article.  Unscintillating (talk) 14:42, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The third party source seems to be The Creationists, which to my eye looks to be kin to The Immortal Storm. There are some minor mentions here and there, often in comments to media articles. The majority of links are from one site, and this is getting pretty close to self-promotion. Perhaps the article could be improved, but the sources I saw with the search tools provided are pretty minimal. --Pete (talk) 19:57, 27 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep The book "The Creationists" is the most important anti-creationist book published so far.  It is long recognized at THE reliable source on Creationists.  Carl Weiland is one a many important Creationists.  Just being mentioned in "The Creationists" makes one a creationist to be noted.  --OtisDixon (talk) 01:51, 28 December 2015 (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.