Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis Di Lorenzo


 * 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.  Sandstein  09:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Dennis Di Lorenzo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of this article does not meet WP:NPROF. The sources don't convince me that WP:GNG is met, either - I don't have access to the Nydailynews source, but the rest are either primary sources or trivial mentions. The interview in Chronicle of Higher Education is an in-depth source, but on its own it is not sufficient. It was created by a sockpuppet of a blocked editor, but has quite a few edits by other people so probably isn't eligible for G5 - most of the recent edits have been serious BLP violations, though. bonadea contributions talk 14:48, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 15:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 15:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. The New York Times article discusses Di Lorenzo both personally and in his professional capacity, and mentions the Aspire program for high school students that he created. Together with the other references, I think it establishes notability. The other point is that something is oddd about his supposed resignation. As an editor of one of the revisions that probably needs to be removed wrote, why would he resign if he was entitled to a paid family leave? Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:15, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep on account of subject passing WP:NACADEMIC #6, as former dean of the New York University School of Professional Studies. (Striking off suggestion following discussion herebelow) Of course, all that citation overkill (eight sources that he was a dean?) has got to go-o-o, and gotta ask the Lord's forgiveness. -The Gnome (talk) 09:18, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Dean of a school within NYU does not satisfy #6. That criterion is only for heads of entire universities. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:35, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Question Is a named deanship like a named chair for notability purposes? I honestly can't recall if this question has ever come up before. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Subject was dean of New York University's School of Professional Studies. I'd presume, David Eppstein, that the position of a NYU school dean is at least equally notable as the position of a named chair or [a] distinguished professor at a major institution of higher education, per WP:NACADEMIC #5. Is it not? -The Gnome (talk) 07:09, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No. Sometimes deans hold ex officio named chairs, but those don't count as the sort of named chair that would pass #5, because that criterion is supposed to be for scholarship (not managerial position) at a level clearly above the average full professor. (It's the same reason that named assistant professorships don't pass: because that's not what the criterion is about.) And sometimes deans have that level of scholarship, but other times they are just managers, so we need to find other evidence for it than being a dean. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:41, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll have to look this over again and come back. If we do not have #5 or #6 I can't see anything else one can hold on to. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 08:51, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If subject does not pass WP:NACADEMIC #5 & #6, then there is no Wikinotability to defend here. It surprised me that deans of schools within a university can't qualify but a careful reading of the guideline makes that clear, since it refers to the highest administrative post of an academic institution. I'll have to withdraw my Keep suggestion. -The Gnome (talk) 23:21, 22 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nothing? on GS and little indication of notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:57, 18 July 2018 (UTC).
 * How do I manage to write with invisible ink online? I have no idea. -The Gnome (talk) 07:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Given both the split views and un-concluded NACADEMIC discussion that has occurred post the last relist I feel this warrants a third relisting

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 23:28, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. He seems to have been primarily a professional administrator, with little scholarly output, at an administrative level below passing for WP:PROF and at what amounts to a glorified trade school within NYU. Even the school's own press release on his retirement as dean could find little to say that was actually about him or his accomplishments. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:10, 24 July 2018 (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.