Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ulrich Kortz

: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. postdlf (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

=[[Ulrich Kortz]]=

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

:({{Find sources|Ulrich Kortz}})

The subject of this BLP wants it deleted. An IP editor tried and failed to have it deleted through PROD and CSD before attempting too send it to AFD. I am fixing the AFD nomination because I do not want to remove an AFD template without giving the community a chance to speak. Andrew327 17:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Keep. To be clear, I believe this article should be kept, even though I am listed as having nominated it. Andrew327 17:37, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment Is there any shred of credible evidence to suggest the IP is actually this person? Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 17:42, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

:::I did not mean to say that the IP necessarily is the subject, but this PROD clearly shows that he is behind the effort to have it deleted: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ulrich_Kortz&diff=567601810&oldid=542645297 dif]. Andrew327 17:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:03, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:03, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Keep. 13 papers with over 100 cites (albeit in a well-cited field) passes WP:Prof#1. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC).

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Keep per Xxanthippe. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:PROF#C1 and per the coverage of his scientific contributions in more popular sources such as ScienceDaily. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:34, 12 August 2013 (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.