Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keren Bergman


 * 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. The nominator's claim that "sources...can't verify the notability of the article" is disproven with a cursory glance at the sources (that is, those sources support the claims to notability in the article and those claims are reasonable). The claim is sufficiently incorrect that I believe SK3 applies here. GeneralNotability (talk) 15:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Keren Bergman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Bergman Stats )

Sources seems like can't verify the notability of the article. Feloniii (talk) 20:54, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Feloniii


 * Speedy keep Keren Bergman is the Charles Batchelor Professor at Columbia University. Per WP:NPROF she is notable. This is only one of three clearly-notable women whose articles were AfDed today by who should not be AfDing articles without a better grasp of Wikipedia policy. HouseOfChange (talk) 14:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NPROF and HouseofChange's arguments above. --Kbabej (talk) 14:46, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per . AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment please first read Reliable Sources, wp:BIO and GNG, the article failed from all of them. From when web profiles are acceptable as a reference?! For example this one, This is very ridiculous. We aren't sure about the correctness of the subject because there isn't enough independent sources. Feloniii (talk) 15:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Feloniii
 * :: Not many professors pass GNG, which is why WP:NPROF is the relevant policy here. Or are you saying that a Columbia University Engineering Dep't faculty page is not a reliable source for whether or not Bergman is the "Charles Batchelor Professor of Electrical Engineering, Columbia University" since 2011? Even WP:SPS can be used as a reference for claims of fact that are not unduly promotional. HouseOfChange (talk)


 * Keep: The sources are adequate for notability. — Toughpigs (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * speedy keep she's clearly notable as per WP:NPROF and WP:NACADEMIC. Also SKCRIT 3 applies. Praxidicae (talk) 15:25, 31 July 2020 (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.