Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Sears McCulloch


 * 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The result was   keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Richard Sears McCulloh (n&eacute;e Richard Sears McCulloch}

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I can find no evidence in Google or Google Books that this person is notable in terms of WP:GNG or WP:PROF, and the article doesn't provide any evidence either besides words, words, words (having published a book or having received an honorary doctorate is not a guarantee for notability, as far as I know). I'll gladly stand corrected, but right now I think this should be deleted. Drmies (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Is Google or Google Books really a good source for someone whose work was done about 150 years ago? I do not think so. I am however neutral as it needs sources. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  21:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, given the copyright issues, it's usually a better source for that era that for more modern subjects. Uncle G (talk) 02:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This is an unsourced biography, created by a banned sockpuppetteer. The banned sockpuppetteer got this person's name wrong and didn't cite good sources, causing all of the trouble here.  I've corrected the name in the searches above.  Use that name, and you'll with ease find two biographies in biographical dictionaries, plus a biography by Milton Halsey Thomas and several biographical details elsewhere.  You'll also find the what-did-you-do-in-the-war fact, not mentioned at all in the banned sockpuppetteer's content, that this person is actually remembered for.  &#9786; Uncle G (talk) 02:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment From the looks of it, it does appear that McCulloch is a fairly important researcher in terms of early thermodynamics. However, it does also seem that all of the information about him is in books that are not available online. Uncle G, while what you said is usually true...but, it gets a bit blurry once you go back to the 1800s. Most of the stuff is offline at the moment, though I am convinced that it is out there. Silver  seren C 03:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep There seems to be enough coverage in the works of Frost and Singer to establish notability. If Silver seren is correct about the subject's importance in thermodynamics, that's even more evidence of thier notability. Edward321 (talk) 13:48, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to the correct name, Richard Sears McCulloh. There are not many sources for McCulloch, but plenty for McCulloh. I have added some content - clearly notable. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:40, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, this is a fascinating dude. Let's keep him. Thanks to Uncle G for their good work--perhaps, Uncle, you would be kind enough to close this AfD and move the article? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I've done the rename, but not the closure. You might like to ask someone such as Ron Ritzman for the latter. Uncle G (talk) 19:41, 9 December 2010 (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.