Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Pinkowski

:{{la|Edward Pinkowski}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Edward_Pinkowski Stats])

:({{Find sources|Edward Pinkowski}})

Appear to be non-notable writer. References are not specifically about author. Appears to fail WP:N. Claim of award is unsubstantiated. reddogsix (talk) 02:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:08, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:08, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:08, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• Keep. Award is sourced ([http://www.polishamericanstudies.org/pastAwardees.html]), through by itself it is rather minor. He seems a notable person, however. John L. Cotter, ‎Daniel G. Roberts, ‎Michael Parrington, 1992, The Buried Past: An Archaeological History of Philadelphia refer to him as a "noted Polish-American historian" (I cannot provide a Google Book link, for some reason it is 404 and broken there). He seems cited a number of times on GBooks and has some publication indexed in GScholar, through not in major journals, as far as I an tell. This amateour-looking publication describes him as "veteran historian" A newsletter of the Polish American Historical Association ([http://www.polamjournal.com/Library/APHistory/buried/buried.html]). [http://www.polishamericanstudies.org/pdf/2013-spring-newsletter.pdf] mentions him thus: "Edward Pinkowski, 95 years old, one of Polonia’s most respected historians and a person who initiated the installation of several historical markers in Pennsylvania" {{cite book|author=John J. Bukowczyk|title=Polish Americans and Their History: Community, Culture, and Politics|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=FF9xcueFv_4C&pg=PA30|year=1996|publisher=University of Pittsburgh Pre|isbn=978-0-8229-7321-8|pages=30–}} more down-to-earth mentions him in passing as an "amateur scholar". I think he passes as a notable Polish-American activist with a sprinkling of amateur academic historian/writer achievements, but I'll ping few people for comments: User:DGG, User:Randykitty, User:Piotr Puchalski, User:Nihil novi. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:41, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
• question1 What is the relative status of the Cavaliers Cross of the Order of Merit of Poland? DGG ( talk ) 05:38, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

::It's the lowest of the 5 classes. Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland calls it the "knight's cross", but the [http://www.pac1944.org/history/ordermerit.htm Polish American Congress] refers to it as a Cavalier's Cross. This means that possessing it probably doesn't in itself establish notability (based on practices for British and other honours). --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• Comment; Library holdings from : Forgotten fathers , 200; Pills, pen & politics : the story of General Leon Jastremski, 1843-1907, 136; History of Bridgeport, Pa., 99; John Siney, the miners' martyr 88. Not insignificant, but I need to check further. This would fit better as WP:AUTHOR than WP:PROF. DGG ( talk ) 05:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

---

• Keep per WP:AUTH. His Pills etc book was reviewed in [http://www.jstor.org/stable/2205601 J. Southern History], [http://www.jstor.org/stable/2936257 J. American History], [http://www.jstor.org/stable/1853189 Am. Hist. Rev.]; Washington's Officers in [http://www.jstor.org/stable/1030365 Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science]. I'm relying on clause 3 and the first three reviews listed: "{{xt|The person has created ... a significant or well-known work ... that has been the subject of ... multiple independent periodical articles or reviews}}". This isn't the strongest keep I've supported, but I think the three reviews in the major historical journals are enough here.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
• Keep -- I was dubious, but the reviews suggest notability. However,this is a poor article mostly about some NN genetic research. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2014 (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.