Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnann Heinrich Diemer

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. Good work, people. DS 14:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Johnann Heinrich Diemer

This one perplexes me, and I've decided to bring it to the attention of the community. I found it after clicking "random article" a few times (which I rarely do.) He was an early 20th century "secretary to the editorial board" of a journal. Its creator has a very sporadic edit history, so asking him about it probably isn't going to prove too useful (although I will leave him a message anyway.) To me this is not an adequate assertion of notability per WP:BIO, but perhaps someone will find some new piece of info to save it. Google is, of course, useless for this. What do you think? Grandmasterka 05:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• A Delete from me. The only assertions not not appear to meet WP:BIO. Secretary to a journal editorial board is a pretty non-notable position. Sadly, lest we ever forget, dying after ill treatment at the hands of Nazis was not uncommon either. Rockpocket (talk) 06:53, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• Reading further, i now realise that he had a book published (postumously) that i originally mistook as a reference for the article. Given this, and the unclear criteria by which a book is considered notable, i'll change to a weak keep. Rockpocket (talk) 07:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep he seems notable. Note: name of article is different than the name in the article. In the article he is also givin a different name when born with unsure spelling. --MarsRover 06:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep – a borderline case, but he seems to be moderately notable in the Reformational Movement (see Reformational philosophy), as the ideas expressed in his Nature and Miracle are still being quoted. --Lambiam^Talk 07:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep verifiable and pre-Google. Dlyons493 Talk 12:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. Google gets 129 hits. I make no other comment as to keep or delete.--Jusjih 14:01, 18 May 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.