Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stan Neeleman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Stan Neeleman
Just an average professor DimaG (talk) 23:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- speedy delete non notable professor, one sentence mini stub that clearly states his lack of notability, not sourced at all, not even a single external link...no brainer.Myheartinchile (talk) 23:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. See the references at this Google Scholar search. --Eastmain (talk) 01:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. The foregoing link actually confirms that this person doesn't meet WP:PROF. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. The newspaper references show that he was a pioneer in using computer technology in law. --Eastmain (talk) 02:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Weak Delete. On one hand he does hold a named chair appointment at a decent law school, which I ordinarily would consider a sign of academic notability (of course, law schools often have bigger endowments and more named chair appointments than other academic departments). On the other hand his scholarly record appears thin: Eastmain's GoogleScholar search returns a grant total of 5 hits and GoogleBooks does not return much either[1]. GoogleNews (all dates) search gives 5 hits[2], so there does not seem to be substantial coverage in conventional newsmedia either. It does not seem to me that the subject passes WP:PROF based on these results. He does appear to be an active practicing lawer, according to his faculty profile[3], which might explain a relative lack of academic impact. It could be that he is notable as a lawer under WP:BIO but a verifiable case for this has not been made. Nsk92 (talk) 07:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per Nsk92. --Crusio (talk) 16:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Named chairs at major universities are notable. Always. GS is not even remotely complete. But as Nsk says, given the relative length of time as a lawyer, from 72 to 05 along with the professorship, apparently an eminent tax & estate planning attorney. Now, this wont be visible in the case law, unlike trial or appeal lawyers, so there can be some difficulty proving it. I would thing that for a practicing attorney to b given a named chair at a major law school is an unmistakable sign of eminence in his profession. he apparently also served on some major government service roles, but I cannot totally decipher them from the sources due t o my unfamiliarity with the profession. DGG (talk) 02:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
- keep per above. Happydazer (talk) 14:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
