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 speedy keep. My error. Thought this was a different article. Went through the process just a few days ago and subsequently was moved. Added references definitely do support notability.
(non-admin closure)Spyder212 (
talk) 03:29, 27 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Does not seem to meet general notability guidelines, far stretch for most
WP:PROF and
WP:NTRACK criteria, unless we want to include almost all university math professors that make it to their 80s and marathon winners...
Spyder212 (
talk) 22:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep Subject was a multiple national champion of the United States, which is point 5 of NTRACK. FYI - this was closed as speedy keep at a different title just two days ago
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom OslerSFB 23:08, 25 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep/Speedy Close. Oh, for crying out loud, the previous AfD for this article,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Osler, was closed just 2 days ago! I was the nominator for that AfD, but give this article a break. Btw, as noted in that earlier AfD, the subject clearly passes part 10 of
WP:NTRACK as an inductee of the
Road Runners Club of America Hall of Fame.
Nsk92 (
talk) 23:22, 25 November 2020 (UTC)reply
With all due respect, I think you erred
Spyder212 in nominating for deletion. The AfD page of the previous version of the article (
Tom Osler) indicates that he qualifies for notability on several points. One in particular, as pointed out by
Nsk92 above is that he is a member of the Road Runners Club of America Hall of Fame, which is specifically criterion 10 in
WP:NTRACK. That alone is sufficient for notability, although he also qualifies by dint of his work on the fractional calculus, which is cited 100s of times, as well. All of this is amply referenced in the page. I request you withdraw the nomination.
Skymath1 (
talk) 09:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC) — Note to closing admin:
Skymath1 (
talk •
contribs) appears to have a
close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. reply
Whoops yes I have a COI with the subject of the article, which I disclosed in the recently-closed AfD page. Thank you for the tag, didn't think to restate it since I just had, but I can see the need for clarity. In any event,it doesn't change the unambiguity of the subject of the article meeting criterion 10 of
WP:NTRACK.
Skymath1 (
talk) 14:54, 26 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep. Passes
WP:Prof#C1 on GS cites for a mathematician. Nominator should explain why he nominated this AfD so soon after withdrawal of
Nsk92.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 23:28, 25 November 2020 (UTC).reply
Keep per
WP:PROF#C1 and per my same opinion on the just-closed first AfD. Possibly speedy as the nominator seems not to have considered the first AfD or provided any reason why the outcome should have changed. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 23:57, 25 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep. I moved the article after the close of the prior AfD, since the subject published mostly under the fuller name. (Apologies if that caused confusion leading to this 2nd AfD.) Meets
WP:NPROF C1 from several papers with 100+ citations in a low citation field, there's also what looks to me to be a credible case for notability from his books on training for distance running.
Russ Woodroofe (
talk) 00:06, 26 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep as the subject meets
WP:NTRACK and
WP:NPROF, as well as a strong claim at
WP:NAUTHOR, all of which is backed up by ample reliable and verifiable sources to back up these multiple claims of notability.
Alansohn (
talk) 00:24, 26 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep: citations of his work qualify him for
WP:PROF#C1, he probably meets
WP:NTRACK#10 as noted by others, and the last AfD was only just closed. — MarkH21talk 10:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Sorry everyone! My error! I thought this was a different article. Now I notice this one did go through the process just a few days ago and definitely is notable for inclusion with the added references. Let's speedy close this one!
Spyder212 (
talk) 03:26, 27 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.