Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolfgang Kosack


 * 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   delete.  MBisanz  talk 02:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Wolfgang Kosack

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Is this guy notable? An IP is adding a bibliography from this guy into Coptic language article in every language except English. Suspect self promotion or paid promotion. --Jacob.jose (talk) 01:55, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Here are global contributions of the IP 178.83.128.189--Jacob.jose (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - It seems that he is published and has been cited, but I could find no third party sources to establish his notability. The references in the article fail to support the assertion that he " is an expert in the translation of the ancient Coptic language." - MrX 02:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not finding any significant coverage, and he doesn't seem to have won any awards (at least, none that I know) or is well-known, so I'm going with delete. Lugia2453 (talk) 02:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete — this issue of Fabula has some citation, but otherwise this subject is very far away from WP:ACADEMIC. He also fails WP:GNG for lack of substantial coverage about him biographically. JFHJr (㊟) 03:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Reeks of self-promotion. We can't even translate from the DE article, because it's pretty much exactly the same as the EN one. Quityergreeting (talk) 00:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Found a review of one of his books in the journal Aegyptus . -- Green Cardamom (talk) 09:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of evidence of passing WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * kEEP -- This is a significant list of publications. I agree that I would like to hear more about the chap, ratehr than  what he has written, but since he writes in German, we are unlikley to find it in English.  The German WP obviously considers him notable, or the article would have eben removed there before translations.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:24, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 04:30, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, insufficient evidence of notability per WP:ACADEMIC. I can see evidence online that a few of his books are in some university library catalogues, but very few cites in GScholar, and can find no coverage online at all of the man himself. Maybe his field is so specialized that I'm looking in the wrong places for sources. Altered Walter (talk) 13:08, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Insufficient sources available to justify an article. --Michig (talk) 09:32, 16 December 2012 (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.