Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter W. Wager

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 of the debate was Delete - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Walter W. Wager

Non-notable person that co-authored a text book. Edit history shows that the article was created by someone with the name "Wwager"; sounds like vanity. -- Where 00:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Vanity article of a non-notable person. doktorb | words 01:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Several book titles have been added. I think that he can now be regarded as notable. TruthbringerToronto 01:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• But there are millions of authors; just because he is an author, doesn't mean he is notable. -- Where 01:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Looks like someone is confusing Wikipedia with Books in Print -- or, in this case Books That Were Once Briefly in Print. --Calton | Talk 02:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - he's notable enough, I think. He has, after all, written a compleat training manual. - Richardcavell 01:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah -- in 1989. Things have moved on a bit in computers, since then. --Calton | Talk 02:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. State university professor, doesn't meet the "Above Average Professor" test. --Calton | Talk 02:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Writing a textbook or two does not make a professor notable - a lot of them do that. NawlinWiki 02:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep Book, even though co-authored, is in its fifth edition. W³ ≠ N². ~ trialsanderrors 02:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Turns out he was not among the original authors. I don't know how that affects the editors who voted per me. ~ trialsanderrors 22:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails WP:PROF. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 05:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per Calton and Ambuj.Saxena. --MCB 06:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Having a book in print for some 25 years is notable. About 30 Google Scholar hits. Dlyons493 Talk 06:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Comment The main objection to this appears to be vanity. Note that WP:VAIN says vanity by itself is not a basis for deletion Dlyons493 Talk 07:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. It still fails WP:VAIN. --Coredesat 06:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as proposal. michaelCurtis ^talk+ _{contributions} 08:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Trialsanderrors. Sufficiently notable, and a username isn't enough to prove that the article is an autobiography. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 13:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Trialsanderrors. While not wanting to encourage vanity articles, I think the subject does meet notability criteria - and the article is at least encyclopedic, not "Walter likes the Beatles, gouda and tantric sex" stuff we usually see in vanity articles. Paddles ^T_C 14:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Noted Trialsanderrors has altered his/her vote, but I choose not to change mine. And before any pedants jump on either of us, we both know full well that AfD discussions are not literal votes, ok? Paddles ^T_C 01:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Delete, admittedly this is right on the cusp of WP:BIO and could go either way, but I'm leaning delete because of the probable WP:VAIN violation unless further evidence towards WP:BIO is put forward...--Isotope23 17:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Isotope23. Aguerriero (talk) 19:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. cøøkiə Ξ _(talk) 22:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete; does not pass the average professor text. Vanity.--Prosfilaes 04:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete unless someone provides a link to his publication list. JeffBurdges 09:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep; notable. Royalbroil 00:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — As it stands, fails WP:PROF. --Satori Son 15:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Not even close to reaching the standards of WP:PROF. 07:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete fails WP:PROF. Vanity page Bwithh 02:01, 25 June 2006 (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.