Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Kegel (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. Dipankan ( Have a chat? ) 10:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Charles Kegel
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Fails WP:PROF. A Google News search (archives) turns up very little other than a few articles about his administrative assistant's murder and the defendant's trial. I don't think that acting university presidents are inherently notable. Bbb23 (talk) 23:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. The previous AfD 3 years ago resulted in no consensus. A fair amount of nit-picking about whether he satisfied one or the other of the various items listed at WP:PROF. Nothing has been done in the last 3 years to expand the article or better establish his notability. Please keep in mind that the academic guideline does not mandate anything and that he should still have significant secondary coverage to satisfy notability guidelines.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:21, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak, weak keep. I prefer to err on the side of caution, which for dead academics means "keep", in my opinion. It's weak, though. His communication textbook received some (short) reviews in academic journals,, , --don't know if you can read those links (from my university access to EBSCO), but they're there. Usually a review or two on an academic book establishes some notability. What's problematic is that the article does not contain much information, and there seem to be two more Charles Kegels around: one a Southerner, and another who worked on John Ruskin and that may have been the same as our guy, but I can't rightly tell. It's not a very usual name so they may be the same. Our guy wrote an article called "lncommunicability in Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye" which is cited or referred to in a few books and articles (including here), and his article "Academic Freedom: An Analysis" (Liberal Education December 1966) is cited at least once (in Liberal Education 1968). In all, it's not that much, but you'll note I can't do the fancy index footwork. Drmies (talk) 14:27, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Although he was an acting president, The article passes the sixth criteria of WP:PROF. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 15:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I don't understand the "although" and I don't see how that criteria applies here. Drmies (talk) 15:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It says,"Criterion 6 may be satisfied, for example, if the person has held the post of President or Chancellor (or Vice-Chancellor in countries where this is the top academic post) of a significant accredited college or university," he has been the president for over a year, so I believe the criteria is satisfied. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 15:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should have been more clear: I am not sure that a temporary appointment satisfies that criteria/on. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:47, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep -- While he might have only been an Acting president, it's of a huge school, and his contribution was sufficient to have the school name a building after him. We've unearthed some decent citations in a field that you shouldn't expect many online cites for a scholar from the 1960s.  It might be a weak pass in several different criteria (academically, administratively, notable outside recognition), but together it's a pretty clear pass. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2012 (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.