Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Georg H.B. Luck


 * 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 Speedy keep; nominator withdrew (non-admin closure). dci &#124;  TALK   00:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Georg H.B. Luck

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable academic. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete for failing WP:PROFESSOR. Qworty (talk) 21:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:08, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:08, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is not the sort of field where I would expect Google scholar to be helpful in judging his impact (especially since he did much of his work pre-internet) but his Arcana mundi is held in nearly 1000 libraries and has nearly 200 citations on Google scholar, his 1997 German-language collection of texts of the cynics has recently been translated into Dutch with a nice review, his The Latin love elegy was translated into 5 languages, the New York Times in the late 1990s recalled him as ten years earlier being a leader of a group of anti-postmodern reactionaries, etc. I think he passes both WP:PROF and WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * PS it turns out that he was also for many years the editor in chief of the American Journal of Philology, giving him a clear pass of WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If you keep this article (which you should), I recommend moving it to Georg Luck. Cf. authority control. Jonathan Groß (talk) 11:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Definitely Keep. He was a major classical scholar who wrote a very important academic book on ancient magic and witchcraft. I support moving to Georg Luck, however.--Morel (talk) 21:52, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. GS search for "Georg Luck" gives some nice cites. Notability apparent as above. The nominator's rationale is disappointingly slender. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2013 (UTC).
 * Keep -- several books published by the top presses in the world of medieval history (Paul Haupt was a very big name in the 1960s). Clear #C1 pass. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 02:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep -- as founder of the page, I am of the opinion that he was certainly significant enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per all of the above. WP:SNOW would seem to apply. Ray  Talk 16:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Withdraw as nominator. I used the original page name as a search term but as noted it is not the commonly used name for him. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:42, 26 February 2013 (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.