Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Kölling


 * 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. The recent expansion of the article and the addition of references clearly establish notability; comments favoring deletion were written prior to such expansion. John254 05:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Michael Kölling

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A "biography" that says he wrote software and has a tattoo. That's not a biography, and he seems to be a basic professor, of which the world has many. Utgard Loki 15:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - his award may make him notable, but no evidence is presented of multiple non-trivial coverage in third-party sources, which is required to establish notability per WP:PROF. Delete unless further sources (independent of the subject) are added by the end of this AfD. Wal  ton  Vivat Regina!  15:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.  -- Pete.Hurd 19:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The article about the award indicates this bio is missing quite a bit of information about his recent positions in Australia. John Vandenberg 21:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I always believe in what I see.  What I saw here was a "biography" that looked like it came from a student who didn't know anything about the professor and had noticed the tattoo.  That it failed as a biography was obvious.  Most professors of most things at most good universities have awards and honors and publications, and so we need to look for the ones who really stand out from the background.  There's no indication here that this fellow does (except for that tattoo!)  Utgard Loki 13:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure; while I understand you dont trust my "feelings", it would be a lot easier if people did :-) Anyway, you have spurred me on to look further. lots of journal articles, at least one book that has been translated into a few languages, an award as is already mentioned on the article and sounds rather prestigious, a "best thesis award" in 2000, 50% shared inventorship of Blue (programming language) and a Senior Lecturer position.  Worth a second look IMO. John Vandenberg 13:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * More content has now been added R.E a BlueJ/Microsoft patient issue —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tony Hunter (talk • contribs) 00:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC).
 * There is more material. I can't quite withdraw my nomination, but it's much better.  (And the stuff about his grad school should really go, as that's CV stuff, not biography stuff.)  Utgard Loki 13:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Something that I believe makes him stand out of the crowd is the BlueJ list of users, firstly it's very large, over 780 institutions and secondly the caliber of the institutions on it: Cambridge University, UK, Durham University, UK, Otto-Nagel-Gymnasium, Berlin - the list goes on. BlueJ, his joint project has spread so far across the globe and to so many thousands of users, I believe that he is worthy of a mention in wiki.Tony Hunter 20:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Rule 3 The person has published a significant and well-known academic work: Kölling has co-written a book that has been translated into at least four languages and is the core text for the CO320 and CO520 Computer Science modules at Kent University.
 * In accordance to the Wikipedia:Notability for academics rules, three reasons why Kölling should stay in wikipedia.

Rule 5 The person is known for originating an important new concept: The object bench was the subject of Kölling's Ph.D dissertation and is key feature of the heavily used BlueJ and a concept that Microsoft have now adapted.

Rule 6 The person has received a notable award or honor: Kölling has received two awards for his work as noted in his entry.

I now quote the Notability (academics) page again:

"If an academic/professor meets any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, they are definitely notable."

Kölling satisfies at least three of these main points and therefore his entry should stay Tony Hunter 15:55, 3 March 2007 (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.