Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter S. Williams
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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Peter S. Williams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Obscure academic, with a junior position at an institution too small and obscure to even rate an article (fails WP:PROF). No indication that his apologetics or ID advocacy has gotten any notice (fails WP:CREATIVE & WP:BIO). There appears to be no published coverage that is either third party or reliable (let alone both). Disputed WP:PROD. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 17:12, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Only claim to notability seems to be that we should consider him notable as an evangelical Protestant apologist, whatever that is. Unfortunately, that is not how notability is measured on Wikipedia. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 11:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There are numerous evangelical Protestants notable in the field of Christian apologetics. There is however no indication that Williams is one of them (so I get your point). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 15:15, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as he is not notable, upon my research. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 17:28, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.