Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas Raab (2nd nomination)
- Andreas Raab (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG (specifically seeing no WP:INDEPENDENT WP:RSs), WP:NACADEMICS (no evidence of meeting any of these criteria), WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Of current sources (at time of nom), the few that actually relate to him are his dissertation and blog posts, community wiki articles, mailing list messages, and other sites allowing self-published content. Google scholar shows some papers, though very few where he was the lead author on. He shares his name with a few other scientists in other fields so look out for those when you look at google scholar. ― Padenton|✉ 20:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. ― Padenton|✉ 20:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. ― Padenton|✉ 20:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ― Padenton|✉ 20:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. I tagged this in March for notability and for primary, self-published and unreliable sources. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG and fails to state a reason the subject is notable in lieu of sources under WP:ANYBIO. Googling turned up nothing useful. Msnicki (talk) 21:00, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
*Keep. Using the search methods provided here ( news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR), brings up a tremendous amount of content about this man, some self-published, some not completely reliable and some I couldn't understand, as it was in German; but there was a substantial amount of content, especially on scholar.google.com, much of which is not self-published, that indicates that Andreas Raab was a bit of a celebrity in his industry. Template:Ormr2014-Signature
Keep There are a lot of reliable independent secondary sources that have been cited. Andreas Raab was one of the original authors, and a leader of a large community around the Smalltalk Squeak community, started by Alan Kay, the father of Object Oriented Programming and one of the original creators of the personal computer. He was a major contributor to the field of computer graphics, virtual worlds, new methods for computer synchronization (Croquet, or Tea Time). I have updated the article to add additional third party references which should be considered before deleting this article. Notice the number of books that have been added as references where Andreas contributed, was thanked for his work or had his worked reviewed by others. Hew was recently eulogized by the head of SAP global innovation group. All of these are reliable third party sources.
Further this deletion request is, in my opinion, a vendetta against my arguments to keep the article NIM. [[1]] by Padenton|✉ and Msnicki (talk) who have tried to retaliate by deleting a slew of articles. Sources of information that were and are in my opinion quite notable are being deleted by Padention and Msnicki. Notice from a comment in the comment in the Nim deletion discussion how many articles are now missing.
- Keep. There are Wikipedia articles about hundreds of programming languages. Many of them don't have any secondary sources. So why do you think Nim is not notable, but the following languages are? Obol (programming language), Picky (programming language), Little Interpreted Language, Seph (programming language), Halide (programming language), Roy (programming language), Plaid (programming language), Join-calculus (programming language), Objeck (programming language), Nemo (programming language), Ooc, Cl4 (programming language), Slave Programming Language, PureScript, Hope (programming language), MX Language, MCTRL, SmilScript, Wigzy, Mobl, Napier88 (I have just picked some random articles) --Trustable (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
- That argument is Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Just because those haven't been deleted, doesn't make this article subject notable. ― Padenton|✉ 00:20, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Also note in [[2]] when the vote when against him Pandenton decided to inappropriately push the issue [3] "Sorry, I really hate when people blackmail me. Please take it to DRV if you think it has any merit.--Ymblanter (talk)"
This is just another long run of actions that should have wikipedia editors to consider the modivations of these editors. Itsmeront (talk) 22:56, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. Please be advised that AFD is not a place to discuss motives or unrelated opinions. It's simply a place to discuss whether or not you believe the article warrants deletion and why. Template:Ormr2014-Signature