Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lindy Scott


 * 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. NW ( Talk ) 20:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Lindy Scott

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article was previously speedy deleted and restored after a deletion review. I don't believe it meets notability criteria either for professors or politicians. Scott's name appears in google scholar and google news a bit because he's co-edited some collections that have gotten reviews. But co-editing is not authorship. Chick Bowen 16:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I haven't had a chance to properly research the article yet. It has only been undeleted for a few hours before getting enthusiastically slapped with an AFD. Here and here are lists of Scott's publications, but they are not up-to-date. Here is an article by well-known religious scholar Martin E. Marty on a volume edited by Scott. Chicago Tribune on Scott 2006 Congressional candidacy. etc. "Scott's name appears in google scholar and google news a bit because he's co-edited some collections that have gotten reviews." 269 Google News, 61 Google Books and 28 Google Scholar hits equals "a bit"? Also, I'm not aware of any Wikipedia policy which says that editing is less notable than authorship. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 17:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Made New York Times three times for the run.  Lectured at schools other than Wheaton per  Made DailyKos at   Mentioned in books by third parties   Thus meets WP notability criteria (not a one event person for congress race). Collect (talk) 19:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable as an academic - his involvement at Wheaton seems to meet at least criterion 5 of the academic notability standards. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete until further evidence emerges. GS cites appear to be negligible. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete Fails WP:POLITICIAN, WP:PROF. Merely getting mentioned for being a candidate, and lecturing at universities, and not even winning the primary (he got 16% of the vote in the primary), comes nowhere close to our notability bar. Ray  Talk 23:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This article does not meet WP:POLITICIAN, WP:PROF policy and it is clear this BLP should be removed. Very little data on Lindy, only is notable for his run and this, in of its self, does not impart notablity (see Stan Jagla for this precedent Jagla's campaign website, he was deleted as well due to non-notability as Lindy should be, as well. Naehteog (talk) 08:56, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * DeleteI can not see the notability of this person. This persons only notability was a failed run in the democratic primary, where Lindy got only 16 percent of the vote. Truthwillsetufree (talk) 11:52, 19 November 2009 (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.