Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eliot Borenstein

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Eliot Borenstein}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Eliot Borenstein}})

Fails WP:GNG. A WP:BEFORE search only shows primary sources. BilletsMauves^€500 14:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:keep How is that book prize nominations are primary sources? Professors unlike sportsmen and movie star do not frequent newspapers to search GNG. They are judged for their work by peers. This one has four prizes for scholarly books. More than enough for notability. --Altenmann >talk 15:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::If you want to see it that way, I still don't see anything that would make him pass WP:NPROF. And one independent (?) source isn't enough to pass GNG. BilletsMauves^€500 17:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::In this case I feel sorry for Wikipedia, you, and professor, in this order. --Altenmann >talk 19:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::::I don't give a damn about how you feel, keep that stuff to yourself. BilletsMauves^€500 21:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::Woof! Grrrrrrrr. Arf! Pascalulu88 (talk) 16:08, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Russia, New York, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:28, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. JSTOR lists many reviews of multiple books by him: [https://www.jstor.org/stable/27059549] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/45408924] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/20453318] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/3090369] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/26286709] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/3086188] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/2679380] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/40651141] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/40870395] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/20451594] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/2697108] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/2679468] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/3086427] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/4213331]. This gives him an easy pass of WP:AUTHOR, and (because they are in-depth reliably published and independent sources about Borenstein's work) an easy pass of WP:GNG. Whatever WP:BEFORE the nominator tried was apparently ineffective, because they should have found these. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:Keep. Clear pass of WP:Prof and WP:Author. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC).

• Keep Passes WP:AUTHOR by way of book reviews, which amounts to passing WP:PROF in a book-oriented field of scholarship. XOR'easter (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Clearly passes WP:AUTHOR due to multiple reviews of multiple books written by the subject. Qflib (talk) 20:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.