Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christoph Schuck


 * 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 delete.  MBisanz  talk 23:40, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Christoph Schuck

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. WP:BLP, with some advertorial overtones, about a political science professor of potential, but not adequately demonstrated or sourced, notability per WP:NACADEMICS. The only "references" here are his own self-published curriculum vitae on his own website, and his faculty profile on the website of the institution where he teaches -- there's no evidence of reliable, independent coverage about him being shown at all. As always, Wikipedia is not a place where anybody is automatically entitled to an article just because he exists: RS coverage which properly verifies passage of a notability criterion must be present, but nothing here satisfies that. Bearcat (talk) 23:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:10, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:10, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TOOSOON. I notified WikiProject Germany a few days ago with no result. I'm unable to locate sufficient sources to justify inclusion at this time, but would be happy to be corrected. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:56, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PROF. Becoming a full professor at a German University is a significant accomplishment but not enough by itself and there seems to be nothing else. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:42, 28 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment -- the subject has a de Wiki article but it's sourced to primary sources and is not very convincing as to the subject's notability: link. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2016 (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.''