Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christoph Marcinkowski (2nd nomination)

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 delete. – Avi 04:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christoph Marcinkowski

Vanity article edited extensively by User:Adul (the subject) and User:155.69.4.123 (an IP registered at Nanyang Technological University, where the subject currently resides). An AfD in March resulted in Keep based on a passus in WP:BIO which no longer exists ("Published authors, editors, and photographers who have written books with an audience of 5,000 or more or in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more"). Despite the strong whiff of self-promotion, the subject (former Associate Professor, now Visiting Researcher at said Nanyang Technological University) does not seem to meet WP:PROF. ~ trialsanderrors 22:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• WP:BIO seems like a very narrow pass under "Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work". Pass of WP:PROF under "The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them." Google Scholar brings up zero hits, and that's a bit troubling, but I'd say weak keep. --Daniel Olsen 23:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, I should add: ScienceDirect: zero hits. JSTOR: zero hits. ISI citation search: zero hits, discounting a physicist of the same name. Newsbank: two articles on the Pope's visit to Singapore written by the subject, no articles on the subject. ~ trialsanderrors 00:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Keep The article has already been cut down considerably several months ago. The author is involved in Christian-Islamic dialogue in Southeast Asia and beyond. In the light of the many misunderstandings between the world's two largest religious communities, his contributions have been widely publicized, recently also in Singapore's leading daily newspaper Straits Times. It would be good if the discussion on this article could be less polemical and more scholarly.

Moreover, I wonder why this obviously strong, one is almost tempted to say "personal interest" in deleting or vandalizing it??? With regard to hits: try first "google" and other search engines. I would be glad if other scholars (!) could enter into this discussion. Moreover, with regard to "self-promoting" etc.: the links to Nanyang Technological University in Singapore (recently rated as among the world's top ten in the fields of sciences, although not a "Western", American, university) has NOT been added by the article's author. In the past, as in the case of earlier attempts to delete or vandalize this site for whatever reason, I had to lament certain prejudices, in particular by certain North American contributors. Again, it would be good to get the views of other, perhaps a bit more scholarly contributors.... By the way, the articles mentioned had not been on the Pope's visit to Singapore (which has not taken place anyway, but on his invitation to dialogue to Muslim scholars). JSTOR is ok, but not necessary telling. Marcinkowski published also under his Muslim name "Ismail Marcinkowski", but anyway, it's up to you guys, I just don't appreciate that aggressive tenor of the one who is again advocating its deletion.... Anyway, whatever.... quite tiring all this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.69.4.123 (talk • contribs)

• Cut down on the accusations, Doctor Marcinkowski. It's the first time I've actually seen your article today. And I didn't know Google was considered a scholarly search engine. Not even scholar.google. ~ dr. trialsanderrors 04:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom and WP:VANITY, particularly nom's research showing no scholarly database hits. --Aaron 04:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete associate professors have not achieved significant notability in their field. If they have, then they become full professors very quickly. Derex 05:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Subject appears to have a successful academic career, but as it stands the article carries no external sources and no links to his journalism (a search of the Straits Times site turns up nothing, and I fear that "contributes commentaries to..." leaves open the possibility that they are letters to the editor). Likely a commendable scholar -- and, in future, quite possibly a notable one -- but not yet. Robertissimo 06:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. *drew 13:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per norm.Alpharigel 19:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Fails WP:PROF and WP:VAIN. trialsanderrors's investigation work and judgement is trustworthy. Bwithh 21:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Insufficiently notable per WP:BIO and WP:PROF. -- Satori Son 14:41, 27 October 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.