Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roy Timmreck

:{{la|Roy Timmreck}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Roy Timmreck}})

As a high school teacher that has written one textbook, the subject does not appear to meet the notability guidelines at WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG. VQuakr (talk) 10:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

• Comment - He's got chopsticks in his long, thin, white hair. If there's a way to keep this article for the photo, lets find it. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
• The photo is public domain, so it can be kept regardless of the fate of the article. VQuakr (talk) 19:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
• Delete The textbook he published doesn't even have it's own article, so I'd say he doesn't meet the criteria for notability. As for the picture, I see no reason why it can't be transferred to the Commons. If the textbook is ever deemed notable enough for an article then this man could be mentioned on the Cupertino High School article. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 15:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:46, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. I've argued for keeping articles of some other high school teachers on WP:GNG grounds but I don't see any evidence for doing so in this case. And "I like his picture" is also not a good reason. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

• Delete - Awesome picture is irrelevant, there is no significant coverage in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 17:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

• Delete I'm glad he is an inspiring teacher and that his students love him enough to create an article about him. But he is clearly not notable enough to be the subject of an article in an international encyclopedia. (For heavens sake, one of the two references is "ratemyteachers".) Maybe they can give him a mention at the article on Cupertino High School. --MelanieN (talk) 03:45, 19 March 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.