Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Rydelnik

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Rydelnik

Delete: Minor academic. No indication that he meets any of WP:ACADEMIC#Criteria (let alone verifiably so), and in any case appears to fail the "It is possible for an academic to be notable according to this standard, and yet not be an appropriate topic for coverage in Wikipedia because of a lack of reliable, independent sources on the subject." clause. Only source given is to the topic's webpage at the institution which employs him. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 06:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —John Z (talk) 07:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. THF (talk) 10:33, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Pass neither WP:PROF nor WP:BIO. His most widely held book in libraries, Understanding the Arab-Israeli conflict, is in less than 100 libraries worldwide according to WorldCat.--Eric Yurken (talk) 16:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He hasn't done anything notable to make him stand out from other academics. I just don't think this man warrants an article on wikipedia.WackoJacko (talk) 01:31, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Moody, despite what might appear to be the implications of its name, is a very important long established (and fully accredited) college, and he is a full professor there, which to me is an indication that he might well be notable. DGG (talk) 06:06, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: even if we accept that Moody is a "major institution of higher education and research" (which is a stretch), Rydelnik is not a "named/personal chair appointment or 'Distinguished Professor'" there, so still fails WP:ACADEMIC#Criteria on that point. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 06:22, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without further evidence, fails WP:PROF. Plastikspork (talk) 16:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep [1] provides enough news sources that either quote him (including the Jerusalem Post) or review his books to lead me to believe he's notable. There is certainly enough out there to write a well sourced (if short) article. Hobit (talk) 20:07, 21 January 2009 (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.