Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Huemer


 * 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. --Ezeu 00:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Michael Huemer
Associate professor; the article makes strong claims of notability which I'm unable to confirm. An ISI citation search puts his most-cited paper at 15 citations. Everything else is in the single digits. ~ trialsanderrors 20:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * delete however there are a ton of these almost but not quite notable in the category Objectivism scholars in wikipedia. this guy might be one of the more notable ones, but does not meat WP:PROF as best as i can tell. --Buridan 00:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Trialsanderrors 00:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Associate professor at a major university, with numerous publications in scholarly journals, plus scholarly books. Seems adequate notablitity for a professor. If the artical gets deleted, I hope he remains philosophical about it and keeps editing Wikipedia. Edison 00:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete no notable (WP:BIO) and created by subject (WP:COI). Cbrown1023 00:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as subject is borderline in terms of notability and his creation of the page seems to violate (WP:COI). --Giddytrace 04:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. -- Kf4bdy talk contribs 07:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: a normal&mdash;i.e. non-notable&mdash;academic who's done some good work, but isn't a major name in his field. Sam Clark 10:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete appears to fail the professor test. Worthy, I'm sure, but I can't find enough reliable secondary sources to ensure neutrality in the article, which is especially necessary since the subject has been involved in writing it. Guy 13:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, it fails Notability (academics) -- lucasbfr talk 21:39, 3 November 2006 (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.