Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Bjarne Berg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 --JForget 01:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Dr. Bjarne Berg
This article was originally speedy deleted under criterion A7, but a DRV determined that notability was asserted and it should have a full AfD discussion. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 6. Despite a fairly clear assertion of notability there is very little evidence for it. No independent reliable sources are given and he does not appear to meet the criteria given in e.g. WP:BIO for notability of persons. Therefore, the article should be deleted until and unless reliable sources demonstrating notability can be found. Eluchil404 (talk) 20:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Recently hired assistant professor at a small liberal arts college; I can't find any citations to his papers in Google scholar. Too soon in his career to have made an impact; does not seem to pass WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete cut and paste from CV with some personal information added.Coffeepusher (talk) 21:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete; Snowball Clause Without evidence of nobility, this article doesn't even have a snowball's chance in hell of getting an unexpected stay from Delete, it has been though the process once and there is no new reason to appeal the original deletion, so their is no need to run it through the deletion process as of WP:SNOWBALL --MahaPanta (talk) 22:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- This article has not been through AfD before. All prior deletions were based on speedy criteria A7 which a consensus at DRV held not to apply. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. This is almost a decent resumé; unfortunately, a resumé, like a good Wikipedia article, requires verifiable references and this article has none. Even if all the info contained therin were verifiable it is questionable whether or not this article could meet notability standards; I think it unlikely. OlenWhitaker • talk to me or don't • ♣ ♥ ♠ ♦ 00:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- weak delete First, the speedy was reversed at Deletion review, as it should have been , because a claim to many publications is a claim to notability. The problem here is how to evaluate the publications: they are not peer reviewed articles, as is usual for most academics. But this individual is working in an applied field, computer science, as an expert of the SAP programs, a major suite of enterprise resource planning software that is important enough to be a reasonable academics specialty. and publishing working papers and miscellaneous articles of various sorts about his subject. Lenoir-Rhyne College is not a major university. It's a liberal arts college with a strong orientation to professional studies in education and business. He's assistant professor there, and had published a long series of working papers and p practical guides and conference talks on this special subject. Many are in what seems to be a leading journal for the subject, even though it is not an academic journal. [http://www.sappro.com/. though it was not emphasised in the publication list, he is the author of 7 books on the program--I've added them. They were published by a specialised published distributed by St.Martins, not a vanity publisher. They're held in libraries--between 32 and 102, for the different titles, which is not that much. There are much mroe important mboosk on SAP, some help in almost 1000 libraries. Not a noted computer expert either..DGG (talk) 06:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete nn prof at low-end university. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:22, 10 March 2008 (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.
