Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Skrbina


 * 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   redirect to Michigan_gubernatorial_election,_2006. Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

David Skrbina

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject is an academic and sometime politician but notability has not been established in either field. He was the running mate on an unsuccessful third-party gubernatorial ticket in Michigan in 2006. His contributions in academia don't appear to have attracted enough attention to pass WP:ACADEMIC. There's a long-form Chronicle of Higher Education piece linked in his article, but it's more about Ted Kaczynski's views and Skrbina's engagement with them then it is about Skrbina himself. The book discussed in the article, Technological Slavery, hasn't attracted much attention either. I prodded this article but the prod was rejected, so here we are. Mackensen (talk) 14:37, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 19:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 19:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 19:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added a second reference to Skrbina's publication of Kaczynski's book, this time a major UK paper which highlights Skrbina's role in the publication. As for his contribution, well he is one of the major writers about Panpsychism, and indeed is cited in teh WIkitionary entry of the same. The WP:ACADEMIC page is actually worth reading carefully, as it points out that teh criteria must be applied more loosely when dealing with the humanities. Try googling Panpsychism, and you will see how often he comes up, although I must admit that I cannot read all the article as they are written in such languages as French, German, Norwergian, Finnish, Italian and what I take to be Japanese. "David Skrbina" gets 12,500 in google. So in light of all this I think the case for ntability has been established. Leutha (talk) 23:27, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You lose at least a thousand of those hits if you exclude Wikipedia and its mirrors. Per WP:CIRCULAR an entry in Wiktionary cannot support an entry here. Skrbina's views on Panpsychism are barely discussed in that article, and only quote from his own works. What's really need are sources by third parties which discuss Skrbina and his views and attest his impact. Mackensen (talk) 00:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (orate)  @ 13:10, 24 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Redirect to Michigan gubernatorial election, 2006, where he is already mentioned. This is commonly done with articles about unsuccessful candidates for office. --MelanieN (talk) 00:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 19:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect seems sensible under the circumstances. "Number of hits" is rarely a good rationale for keeping an article but it might indicate that there are more sources to be found. No objection to future recreation via WP:DRV on that basis.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 01:38, 2 February 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.