Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert L. Tiemann


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn with no delete !votes. Rlendog (talk) 19:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Robert L. Tiemann

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unreferenced BLP of a baseball historian. He seems to pop up periodically in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch as the local baseball expert, but I don't think that he passes the notability bar set by WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG. Pburka (talk) 15:28, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Gbooks and GScholar seem to indicate he is a prolific author on baseball history, whose works are frequently cited by others. Edward321 (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions.  — I, Jethrobot drop me a line 18:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment Per WP:UGLY, the fact that the article is currently unreferenced is not in itself a reason to delete if references exist somewhere. However, per WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG, more independent sources are needed than the St. Louis Post-Dispatch if this is to be kept. —Bagumba (talk) 20:30, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Article meets WP:AUTHOR by the subject being cited by multiple independent reliable sources (which have been added to the article since original AfD nomination). —Bagumba (talk) 05:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Snow Keep. Not even close.  Prolific author.  Noted as an expert in his field.  Major award.  WP:Before should have obviated any inclination by nom to bring this to AfD.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:18, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. The article has improved significantly since I nominated it. Note that the award he received is for "exceptional SABR volunteers". I'm not sure that's evidence of notability; lots of organizations recognize volunteers in some way. I'm still bothered by the fact that there are few references other than the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Is he known outside of St. Louis? However I do acknowledge that there are a number of books which cite him as an expert, which I think is evidence of notability. Pburka (talk) 04:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoa, this was one of the first articles I ever started on Wikipedia. Alex (talk) 10:15, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment ... or if not a snow keep, alternatively a withdrawal by nom would work. I might note that per wp:before, nom (who seems even-handed and well-intentioned) should look for such sources himself before making the nomination -- it is not requisite that the refs be in the article, but only that they exist, and a search for them should be undertaken prior to nomination.  As to the SABR award, a minor point given the above comments, it appears that it is actually for exceptional SABR "members" -- not volunteers -- and given the nature of the organization and the fact that it is their highest award, arguable is notable.  Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 14:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Consider nomination withdrawn. Apparently someone has now corrected the description of the Bob Davids Award. I did search for references and found the newspaper references from a single paper. My search of book references was less thorough, but even then I note that the book references appear to be passing references, even if they do describe the subject as an expert. Pburka (talk) 15:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. And yes -- I corrected the Wikipedia description, based on the ref (just goes to show that we can't always rely on wikipedia!).  Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:42, 17 July 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.