Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory Hodge

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 speedy keep. Per WP:SK#1, the nominator has withdrawn their deletion nomination, and there are no outstanding delete !votes. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 00:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Hodge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable high school educator. Although Hodge was the topic of a very nice New York Daily News profile on the occasion of his retirement, that appears to be the only coverage available for him. The school he headed is notable, but he as an individual does not appear to be. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:08, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless other evidence comes to light. I'd note that this page has been speedy-deleted before as mentioned on the article creator's usertalk page and the new page appears to have been posted just after the speedy deletion of the old one (and I think only a minute later). Neonchameleon (talk) 18:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other evidence came to light. Change to Keep Neonchameleon (talk) 01:07, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Change to keep -- Yngvadottir (talk · contribs) has done yeoman's work in finding other sources. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:31, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. The news coverage now in the article is enough for WP:GNG. (I found this through the academics and educators deletion sorting list but WP:PROF is not really aimed at educators at the secondary school level so GNG is the more appropriate notability criterion.) —David Eppstein (talk) 21:32, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've not yet been able to find any information on his earlier teaching, but I found and added several extended discussions of his work in newspapers, and some book sources. He is one of the principals given a chapter-length profile in a Heritage Foundation book, so I added that as Further reading. I think the article now demonstrates that he meets WP:GNG. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.