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.
Geschichte (
talk) 10:47, 10 November 2020 (UTC)reply
@Nominator. There is a well-cited book on GS and some other publications with minor cites. What is your assessment of these?
Xxanthippe (
talk) 02:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC).reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
TheSandDoctorTalk 14:32, 4 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Fails
WP:NACADEMIC. Coverage isn't focused on him. --
Kbabej (
talk) 17:55, 4 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete Lacks sources about the subject.
Reywas92Talk 21:15, 4 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Weak delete as
WP:Too soon. Theology is a very low cited area and the GS record is slender at present with one book at 246 cites (good for theology) but not much else.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 21:38, 4 November 2020 (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.