Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Rauber

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The result was Keep - Nomination withdrawn (Non administrator closing per Non-administrators closing discussions). --Tikiwont 12:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Rauber

Paul Rauber (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

doesn't meet notability requirements. Individual is a senior editor for a magazine. Senior Editors are not in and of themselves notable.Balloonman 02:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

As mentioned below---nominator withdraws concerns over article. KeepBalloonman 06:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - does not meet notability, not very much press coverage, just not a good article. Redian (Talk) 04:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Gets 28,400 Google hits, 50 Google scholar hits, and is cited in 47 different books on books.google.com. Nomination is bad faith; Balloonman wants to delete a quote from Rauber from the Holocaust denial article, so he's first trying to get the Rauber article deleted for "non-notability". Jayjg ^(talk) 05:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I did find him while looking up the credentials of Paul Rauber on the article. The article makes NO CLAIMS to notability... except the fact that he is a senior editor on a magazine. His being an editor on a magazine will cause a lot of hits on google---as would any journalist/magazine editor. The question is, does that make him notable---no. Now, if he has been cited in 47 books, then that does make him notable and will withdraw the opposition. But please do remember to assume good faith.Balloonman 06:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - seems very notable. Google can find lots of articles, I added one for now. Crum375 05:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. The Google hits include lots of reliable sources. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 05:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Nom reeks of disrupting to make a WP:POINT. It is true, senior editors are not in and of themselves notable, however this is the senior editor of Sierra Club magazine for crying out loud. The cites provided by Jayjg speak for themself. RFerreira 06:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Now I will call you on this. The article makes no claims to any notability---the sierra club magazine doesn't make a senior editor notable. Prior to your post, I had already conceded that if he was cited in 47 articles that I withdraw my nom. But it was in no way shape or form a WP:POINT. The article is a short stub with NO CLAIMS of notability.Balloonman 06:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per other "keep" voters fuzzy510 06:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep seems quite notable to me. Ben W Bell talk 07:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 08:42, 13 June 2007 (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.