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 keep (non-admin closure). Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:05, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gennaro Auletta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article is a monograph and is the only edit by the creator. It has links (all to the subject's own work or websites) but no references. Guy (Help!) 09:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Nordic Dragon 09:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Nordic Dragon 09:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Nordic Dragon 09:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Seems to pass the guidelines for philosophers. Bruno Mammoth (talk) 08:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. Quantum information theory is a high-citation field. As such, I don't think one moderately-well-cited book (222 cites in Google scholar for Foundations and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: In the Light of a Critical-historical Analysis of the Problems and of a Synthesis of the Results) and nothing else over 60 is good enough to convince me of a pass of WP:PROF#C1. But fellowship in the Linnean Society of London is enough of an honor (WP:PROF#C3) to push me over the fence from delete to keep. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Passes WP:Prof as a philosopher rather than as a scientist. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:27, 7 March 2016 (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.