Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terry Rephann


 * 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 of the debate was delete (Liberatore, 2006). 14:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Terry Rephann
unnotable ackoz 18:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as not meeting notability requirements for academics. Deli nk 20:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep he passes my notability threshold. snug 20:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Article is not verified. Plenty of google hits if someone wants to do the work to verify the claims.  He seems to be this guy, but that is just a resume, not a generally reliable source to establish notability.  Withholding to see if verification is done.  GRBerry 01:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The creator has only been online for a 1.5 hour burst when this article was created. Nobody else has cared enough to do it, and I don't feel it is worth my editing time, even if the claims were all true.  Article is not verified, so notability is not established.  Delete GRBerry 03:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep If the info is true, he seems notable to me: extensive publications (but what kind: articles, reviews, letters) in a number of journals. But it's very badly written for a Wiki-article: long lists of info, too many details, too little structure. Right now, it's a resume, not an article. The author needs to add citations and also write a bibliography with names, dates, etc of some publications. Inter lingua  talk 02:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * *Comment Surely we cannot keep on tha basis that it may be sourced in the future; since this AfD has not provoked sourcing how can we assume it ever will be? BlueValour 23:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - since it is unsourced we cannot assume that anything in it is true. It is for the creator and subsequent editors to source claims and they have conspcicuously failed so to do. BlueValour 23:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable enough, and unverifiable.--Konstable 06:59, 27 June 2006 (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.