Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugh Darwen (3rd nomination)


 * 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. While there hasn't been a lot of participation in this discussion, the last AFD was closed a little over a month ago and there's enough to show that consensus hasn't changed. Let's wait at least 3 months before beating this horse again. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:24, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Hugh Darwen
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

May not meet the notability criteria UKWikiGuy (talk) 20:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 20:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 20:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep The arguments for the Keep on the January 2011 nomination still look persuasive. In addition, a look at the Google Books link turns up a wide variety of books covering Darwen's work, for example "The relational model was originally conceived by Dr. Edgar F. Codd and subsequently maintained and developed by Hugh Darwen and Chris Date as a general model of data.". AllyD (talk) 20:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, definetly keep. This is the third time the same user nominates the same article for deletion, without adding any reason whatsoever.  I guess some disciplinary action would be in order, because such an obnoxious behaviour denotes a personal grudge.  The article is still more solid than last time, with more information, more references and better formatting. — 189.61.94.90 (talk) 03:29, 6 March 2012 (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.