Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tadeusz Patzek


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Tadeusz Patzek

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Nonnotable engineer, tagged since March 2017 Staszek Lem (talk) 21:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:18, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:18, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. He has publications, and he was briefly mentioned in a couple of news sources. However, he does not seem to satisfy any of our notability criteria. My very best wishes (talk) 19:09, 22 September 2017 (UTC) I do not know if he satisfies our notability guidelines, but this is just a typical "Who is who" page. It tells almost nothing interesting or useful on the subject. There are no even links to any useful information. My very best wishes (talk) 12:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Notability is an attribute of an article subject, not of an article as it currently exists. And, anyway, why shouldn't an encyclopedia article just state the basic facts about its subject? That's what happens in nearly all paper encyclopedias, and there is no reason why Wikipedia shouldn't also have short articles, made even shorter by your removal of content from this one by your insistence that it should only include content from the most recent of sources. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Basic facts are fine. But after looking at sources, I do not think this page can be improved. Even his place of work at University of Texas can be verified only using University website . My very best wishes (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you not believe that the University of Texas is a reliable source for who held what position there? For articles about entertainers, sportspeople etc. we accept sources well below the standard of universities, who would suffer enormous reputational damage if they were shown to publish falsehoods. And why do you talk about whether the article can be improved? That would be good, but the article is perfectly fine as it is. We don't need trivial biographical details such as his inside leg measurement or favourite food. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:12, 25 September 2017 (UTC)


 *  Keep  per WP:PROF criterion 5, and quite probably other criteria. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Which source tells he is a "Distinguished professor"? I do not see any. My very best wishes (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I could have sworn that one of the sources that was in the article yesterday confirmed that he had been Cockrell Family Regents Chair at the University of Texas at Austin, but it seems that I was mistaken. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 15:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Here is most recent source mentioning the person, and it tells he works in a different place and has a different position. Nothing about University of Texas.My very best wishes (talk) 15:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know, but he fomerly worked at the University of Texas. The thing that is unverified is his claim to have held a named chair there. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 16:24, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * His web page at UTexas mentions both the Cockrell chair and the Lois K. and Richard D. Folger Leadership Professorship. The Folger one appears to be an ex officio chair for the head of a department, rather than one assigned personally to him on the basis of outstanding scholarship, so it doesn't count towards notability. But the Cockrell chair would presumably count, if we could find a more independent source for it. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:52, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:PROF. I found this source which, as an official press release from the university, should serve as adequate verification that he held the Cockrell Family Regents Chair at the University of Texas. His Google scholar profile also gives him a very clear pass of WP:PROF, with 18 publications cited over 100 times (5 would be enough to convince me), one over 1000, and an h-index of 42. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:57, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. David Eppstein was able to find a source confirming a pass of WP:PROF, and it seems that the subject also passes other counts of WP:PROF. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep due to his Google Scholar record - he has several solo-authored works at 100+ cite. I do have my doubts about PROF#C5 (let's keep in mind this is a guideline, not policy); stuff like doesn't strike me as particularly significant. How selective is the criteria for getting this title? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind that GNG is also a only guideline. So unless we can find another policy that bears on this decision, that's the highest level we're going to find. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Holding the named chair at the University of Texas is a sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:54, 27 September 2017 (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.