Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Michael Fenster

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was:  Delete. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 08:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Michael Fenster


Examining this again, it occurs to me there's no significant reviews because his books were so close to each other there's hasn't been the reviews that would've helped this, since he's certainly not notable as a professor. SwisterTwister  talk  00:27, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Plausibly notable. The reviewers think he is not notable. User:MatthewVanitas, why do you say "You must footnote all content about him" ? While a good idea, I don't believe he must, and further, it is irrelevant to the notability concerns. The real reason this draft is here at MfD is the tendenditious resubmissions without attempting to address concerns, or even responding. We need a better solution. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:37, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. While there is a plausible claim of notability here, there isn't a properly sourced one — the referencing is far too strongly dependent on a linkfarm of primary sources and blogs. If somebody can do better than this, then they're certainly welcome to — but there's no value in hanging onto a draft that's being tendentiously resubmitted over and over again without the necessary improvements. Bearcat (talk) 17:57, 2 February 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.