Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Matanle


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 06:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Peter Matanle

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject has requested article be considered for deletion via OTRS The Rambling Man (talk) 06:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No third-party references, fails WP:PROF. The unencyclopedic tone could be dealt with, but even fixed up, this article wouldn't pass WP:GNG. Yunshui (talk) 07:36, 13 October 2011 (UTC). The unencyclopedic tone could be dealt with, but even fixed up, this article wouldn't pass WP:GNG. Yunshui (talk) 07:36, 13 October 2011 (UTC).
 * Please delete this article from Wikipedia. Some years ago, on the advice of a publisher, I was urged to place an entry on Wikipedia. Lacking sufficient knowledge about Wikipedia I complied with this request. Occasional vandalism (such as is present right now) and false information being posted from time to time means I am no longer happy to have the article included. Although I might, just, qualify on one or other rule for inclusion as an academic WP:PROF, I don't believe that removing the article will be a detriment to public knowledge, as I am not a public figure in the way that other living persons and academics listed in Wikipedia might be. Thank you. Signed: Peter Matanle. WP:GNG. Kyogata (talk) 10:27, 13 October 2011 (UCT).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The whimsical tone of the current entry is amusing but not close to what we need in an encyclopedia article, and there doesn't seem to be much basis in sources nor much support from WP:PROF for for fixing it up. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:03, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Before nominating this for AfD, it would have been good to peruse the edit history of this article. As Kyogata says, it was repeatedly and blatantly vandalized. I have removed as much as possible the vandalism. Matanle was "general editor" of the electronic journal of contemporary japanese studies (now listed as "publishing editor"). That journal currently has no article, but given how long it has been around, it is perhaps notable and in that case Matanle would be notable under WP:PROF#8. On the other hand, neither GScholar nor the Web of Science give much evidence of impact (both give an h-index of 3). Given the (at best) borderline notability, I think we should honor the subject's request voiced above. --Crusio (talk) 17:28, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * For your information, we received a request from the subject, he was given the options, he opted for AFD. Thanks.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: If I was in school in Sheffield I'd consider signing up for his course, but he's got little or no secondary coverage. EEng (talk) 22:28, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Tiny presence on GS: far too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:46, 14 October 2011 (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.