Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yung Suk Kim


 * 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. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 02:16, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Yung Suk Kim

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Questionably notable and improvable as the best my searches found was here, here and here and the current version is not simply convincing of better improvement. This simply has not better changed since starting in July 2009. Pinging past users including others who are interested with Christianity, , , , , and. SwisterTwister  talk  06:56, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: 47 cites on Google Scholar for Christ's body in Corinth: The politics of a metaphor in this field suggests a pass for WP:PROF #1. StAnselm (talk) 08:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete or rewrite Looks rather promotional of his philosophy (or do I mean theology?). I'm not actually sure why I've been pinged - my interest in Christianity is from the outside and I've never been part of it. I have a certain fascination with seeing how a few texts can be turned into so many conflicting schools of thought. I do spend a lot of time here dealing with advertising and promotion, and I feel this article comes into that area. Peridon (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability has not been established. It is not clear that any of the journals that he serves as editor for is notable. It is not clear that any of his works are considered significant in the field or that he is highly respected by his peers. No notable honors have been stated.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: The author is well-known, per StAnselm above.The Cross Bearer (talk) 02:34, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: as quite frequently cited author, an academic with number of entries in Google scholar and editor or two peer reviewed adamedic journals - he seems to have sufficent notability. The quality of the article is a seperate issue; and yes it does need some attention. But not perhaps as much as alleged. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  11:27, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Multiple books by respectable publishers. Biblical interpretation : theory, process, and criteria is in 441 libraries, quite high for the field, which indicates wide academic use.  Christ's Body is in 200, again quite high for the topic. For the humanitieies, its the disssemination of library holding which shows the influence  more than the citations.  DGG ( talk ) 21:03, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as per my own brief searches and as per DGG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:29, 4 November 2015 (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.