Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Felix Biestek

:{{la|Felix Biestek}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Felix Biestek}})

Appears to fail WP:Academic as there are insufficient reliable sources to establish notability. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep Has a full editorially written obit in the NY Times, which is an excellent and sufficient reliable source to prove notability. I think no article on a person with such an obit has been deleted from Wikipedia in the last 4 years, even for mere society figures without any contribution to any particular profession. There has sometimes been a challenge about NYC local figures, where it is challenged that the Times might be acting as a local, not a national, newspaper, but even these have been kept. Anyway, his career was in Chicago, so obviously the NYT considered him of national importance. Are we supposed to know better? In addition, clearly meets wp:prof. #4 , impact on education, by having written a widely used and translated textbook. (I documented it by refs to the translations and the reviews) I suggest the AfD be withdrawn on the basis of the signif. of the obit. DGG ( talk ) 23:23, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
• Keep Thank you for turning up the new source which establishes notability. I withdraw the deletion nomination and ask that this be closed. Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:22, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:51, 3 May 2011 (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.