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. czar 21:10, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Deskin[edit]

[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)

Notability questioned via tag since May 2015. Both online and offline source searches ("Gerald+Deskin" Google, Books, WorldCat) only seem to turn up sources published by Deskin, not about him, save for an obituary in a local newspaper. There's little indication that the book he co-authored had a major impact on its field and, conjoined with the lack of major reviews, means he appears to fail WP:NAUTHOR. SITH (talk) 11:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 13:27, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 13:27, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 13:27, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lack of secondary coverage to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:31, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 07:37, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I did find this [1] but that is certainly not enough to cover WP:BIO which requires "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". Jovanmilic97 (talk) 13:27, 10 March 2019 (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.