Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthias Berking

: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. I was choosing between no consensus and keep; it is borderline, and I have chosen keep just because the later votes are all keep. In any case, the article will not be deleted for now.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

=[[Matthias Berking]]=

:{{la|Matthias Berking}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Matthias_Berking Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Matthias Berking}})

WP:BLP of a psychologist and academic, making no real or properly sourced claim of notability for it — it's really little more than a straight repost of his own CV, and is sourced exclusively to a PDF of, guess what, his own CV. This is not how a person gets a Wikipedia article. He might qualify if something substantive and reliably sourced could be written about him — but Wikipedia is not LinkedIn, so nothing claimed here entitles him to keep an article that's written and sourced like this. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

:::Have you looked at the links above? Xxanthippe (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC).

  • Delete. Clinical psychologist with a few publications. Appears to fail GNG. Doesn't appear to qualify as an academic. Happy to listen to arguments to the contrary. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 00:00, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 TT me 12:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:41, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:41, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep perhaps as the Professor of Psychology at Erlangen University would seem convincing and notable enough for an article. If not, then delete I suppose if the current article is still questionable. Notifying {{U|DGG}} for analysis. SwisterTwister talk 05:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep. Clearly notable as both WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR. Writer of major textbooks is German and English. 3rd party verification needs to be added for the publications. His official CV is fine for the rest. DGG ( talk ) 05:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

::Has written textbooks, but are they "major"? Evidence based on academic cites or otherwise would be appreciated. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 19:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 03:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2016 (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.