Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kurt Richebächer

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 no consensus. Daniel (talk) 10:34, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Richebächer

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography with no claim made for notability, and no reliable sources cited. LK (talk) 02:58, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Halten" – Looks like this an article refimprove problem, and the cure is not deletion. A click on the Google Scholar button above came up with lots (137) of citations to and by Richebächer. The other ref-help links (above) produced results that look good to my untrained, non-economist eye. (For example, NYT says he was the "former chief economist of West Germany's Dresdner Bank".) – S. Rich (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SIGCOV. Right now the article has a single citation to a website that looks like a memorial, which renders it original research. I can't find any "newspaper" articles online. I found ten "news" articles online, few of which are about the subject, and all but two are blogs. Please make an effort to prove he passes WP:PROF. Tagging DGG. Bearian (talk) 22:08, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Probably Keep. Not a professor, but a notable economist with sufficient publications. It's difficult to judge the significance of specialized s in German, but his works are each in about 50 of the uS major academic libraries. There is no easy way to see how widespread the influence is in Europe, and especially no w eeasy way in the US to look for German reviews of books like these. The only reason I hesitate is that the deWP does not have an article on him, and it's the sort of topic they're very good with. DGG ( talk ) 01:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep a notable economist, there have been numerous articles about him in the financial press. --Devoke water 01:12, 22 February 2021 (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.