Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brigitte Peucker

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 keep. Punkmorten 17:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brigitte Peucker

Not a notable enough person to warrant an enyclopedic entry. Crunch 14:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

• I still say Delete even though suddenly today after months of inactivity someone in obvious response to the AfD notice came in and added parts of her resume to try to make the article more notable. Crunch 14:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• This is another obvious keep of a notable academic. She has published three books and probably many articles, and she has a leading position at a major university. What else do you want? We include professional baseball players just for being professional baseball players, as if that was something notable. Why exclude obviously important academics? The little work I did on the article probably didn't take more time than it took for you to list it here. u p p l a n d 14:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • P.S. An additional comment: I found all three of her books by searching in the Swedish National Library Catalogue Libris, and one of them, Incorporating images : film and the rival arts (1995), is held in nine of the Swedish research libraries included in the catalogue. I think this shows that she has a scholarly reputation that is not limited to American academia. u p p l a n d 16:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• keep as per Uppland Jcuk 15:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep notable, and published academic B.ellis 16:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable enough for Swedish research libraries. Kappa 18:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Uppland Dlyons493 Talk 21:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Very impressive credentials. -- JJay 23:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• However, my point is that almost any tenured professor at a 4-year research university in the US could post his or her CV and show similarly impressive credentials. My question is, do we want Wikipedia to include all of these people? I'm not sure. Crunch 18:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
  • As I pointed out above, we already include every 20-year old who has been payed by someone to play ball publicly. And I am not sure what you mean by "4-year research university". Anything "4-year" in the U.S. is, I assume, a college, not a research university. u p p l a n d 19:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
• keep. she's a PROFESSOR at YALE. Kingturtle 09:22, 11 January 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.