Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fred M. Donner

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 of the debate was keep. -- King of Hearts talk 02:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fred M. Donner

  • Delete, unless the notablity of this person is established then I vote delete. Jersey Devil 05:16, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment User Jersey Devil appears to be on the war path against User Striver by proposing all articles created by the latter for deletion. Sad. Lambiam 16:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete We can't go listing every single professor in the world, can we? dcandeto 06:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as nn. --Terence Ong 08:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete As per Dcandeto. --Ricaud 09:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. A full professor of Near Eastern History at the University of Chicago, which is a leading institution in that field. Has published two major monographs on early Islamic history, as well as a translation of a volume of the history of al-Tabari (one of the most important early Arabic historians), published a large number of articles in reputable journals and is a journal editor himself. His c. 500 page The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981) was called "a major contribution to the understanding of early Islamic history" by the reviewer in the International Journal of Middle East Studies 1983, p. 577. Checking the Swedish National library catalogue I note that all three of his books are available in 3 or 4 leading research libraries.[1]. (That's all from about five or ten minutes of searching.) If we can have an article on every professional baseball player in America, we can have one on Donner too. I wish Striver would write more useful articles, but that is not a reason to assume a priori that anything or anybody he writes about is "non-notable". u p p l a n d 09:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
comment - This info should be put in the article - Uppland:hint, hint as you have done the research. -Oscar Arias 19:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per Uppland. Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 11:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per Uppland. Monicasdude 15:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep See botom half of Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam:The Muslim Guild/Articles for deletion --Striver 15:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep notable professor and author, per Uppland. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 15:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Jersey Devil stop trying to make a Point -Irishpunktom\talk 16:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak keep, definitely not a necessary article... but, why not? gren グレン 18:49, 16

March 2006 (UTC)

  • Weak keep, per gren, but the article needs more info on why he is notable. -Oscar Arias 18:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Uppland. Encyclopedia Britannica cites the The Early Islamic Conquests as a reference in its section on Iraq. Capitalistroadster 19:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • keep per Uppland. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 21:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Uppland. — Adrian Lamo ·· 21:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep per Uppland B.ellis 21:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and please research AfD nominations before making them. Dlyons493 Talk 22:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment AFAIK people are not obligated to research articles before proposing them for deletion, though that may be preferable. There is a burden of proof upon the creator of the article to include information on notability, etc. and if that info is not there, and if the article apparently violates WP policies that are named in the nom, it's not unreasonable to AfD it. Esquizombi 01:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, while the publication history and books are not enough alone to sway me, the translation of the history of al-Tabari is impressive. Great research, Uppland. Dlyons493, in defense of Jersey Devil, the article did sit as a one-line stub for four months -- Samir (the scope) 00:10, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment, it is up to the author to establish notablility and a one sentence article unchanged for months does not do that. I am sorry for not knowing the importance of every single academic in existence. With that I change my vote to a conditional keep so long as the information mentioned in this afd is added to the article to meet with WP:V, if it doesn't then I still vote delete.--Jersey Devil 01:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

am sorry for not knowing the importance of every single academic in existence he says, without even have bothered to click the link i provided in the article. --Striver 02:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Comment, your link is to his faculty page at the University of Chicago! Pracitically every academic has a faculty page! It means absolutely nothing.--Jersey Devil 02:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
    • You questioned the verifiability of the individual. A faculty link should resolve that. Perhaps you meant WP:N? --Irishpunktom\talk 12:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Uppland, but please add info to this article! Esquizombi 01:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Zain 02:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Notable professor at a notable school. Nigelthefish 16:55, 20 March 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.