Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professor Douwe Korff


 * 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. Moved to Douwe Korff. Sandstein 23:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Professor Douwe Korff

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

An unsourced biography. As per WP:BLP, all unsourced material must be removed. Note also that a tag requesting more sources has been in place for two weeks, with no improvements. Regarding notability, I can't find more than trivial coverage when searching for "Douwe Korff" on google news. — Ksero (leave me a message, things I've done) 11:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.   —David Eppstein 16:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment What BLP actually says, is that "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material" must be removed. In any case, if you found some sources in Google News, even less than ideal ones, why not add them as a start? But this does need some more information for notability, such as publications.DGG (talk) 20:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment DGG is right, you should re-read what BLP actually says. I've just trivially verified most of his biography; he does turn up in various news articles e.g. BBC (apparently as a hearing witness? maddeningly they don't say) and is called an expert on international law in the field of data privacy. The question is whether this satisfies WP:N or WP:PROF. There are some citations on Google Scholar but he is not a widely published or cited author. His work is cited as a source in several books on The Troubles and more on data privacy, though. I'm leaning toward a weak keep here. --Dhartung | Talk 21:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with the above two comments. The article is poorly sourced, but the subject seems to be notable. I would rename the article to "Douwe Korff" or "David Korff", though, Wikipedia generally does not include academic titles. --Crusio 21:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I think i've fixed the problem of there not being any sources (thanks to Ksero for the link). Most of it seemed to come from his profile at the Met or his CV (which is published on the Met site). The only remaining issue is now notability. There are some links to papers he has published on his profile, which might help, and there are probably some in his CV. The article is unlikely to be contentious as it seems to have been started by his son, or someone related to him. CaNNoNFoDDaTalk 14:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - IMO, minor notability. Tiptopper 14:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I have reformatted the links. I do not consider the references mentioned very substantial, but here are also a number of publications in GS. I will add them. It passes the bar. Of course it myst be retitled, but its confusing to do this now. DGG (talk) 03:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename per DGG. Bearian 21:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * weak keep Noy much published... not muched cited Victuallers 15:59, 14 November 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.