Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erik Rauch


 * 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 per the deletion policy, because this case is not particularly controversial. Some of the material should be pruned, but he passes the notability standard for academics by having published many scientific papers, including one in Nature. YechielMan 19:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Erik Rauch

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

does not appear to be notable enough Er rab ee 22:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think that his publications and his accomplishments add up to notability. --Eastmain 23:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Some high quality and widely cited papers plus Metacarta make the cut to notability. The latter may actually deserve an article on its own. Stammer 05:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Most professors have more papers widely cited in their respective profession. Yet they are all subject to WP:PROF, which I believe Rauch does not meet. Er rab ee 09:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The article needs development, and I have started developing it. There are 10 major scientific papers in his main field, in a range of the most prestigious journals. If the details of his remarkable career are examined, I think he can be shown to be one of the rare cases of a postdoctoral fellow who had done truly important work in his scientific speciality--in addition to his notability in other fields of interests. He died too early to actually become a professor. (COI--I was associated with his Department at Princeton, but not while he was there). DGG 07:42, 17 April 2007 (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.