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The result was keep - withdrawn. The Evil Spartan 23:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Hayward

[edit]

Non-notable author (who has, btw, massively spammed his page: see here) The Evil Spartan 17:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I can't decide until I get home, because many of the sources are blocked from work; he apparently is most notable as the author of a work in defense of Holocaust deniers, which he has since tried to distance himself, but someone with unfiltered internet access will be better able to fill in details to determine notability. -FisherQueen (Talk) 18:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the plot thickens... The Evil Spartan 18:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Neutral~~ - I'm not going either way on this one. On one hand, he's got only 900 Google hits for "Joel Hayward" (which may include a couple of others with that name). On the other, he's got multiple non-trivial references, such as this from the New Zealand Herald, this from Yahoo! News, and others such as here, a subscription-only piece in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Others are from places like Stormfront and their ilk, and Jewish groups concerned with the debate. He's got published works, and may squeeze up against WP:BIO with all of this, but I'm right on the fence. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 00:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ ~~Delete unless fixed~~. The only external source that I see listed in this article is a link to a U of K press ISBN. That proves he's a published author, but that does not make him notable. Groupthink 00:47, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm satisfied this article has been sufficiently fixed. Groupthink 05:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clean - Based on the above NZ Herald and Yahoo stories, he's notable for recanting his masters thesis that was rescinded for relying too heavily on Holocaust deniers as unchallenged sources. I note that Evil Spartan had to clean up the book's article Stopped At Stalingrad which has been an orphan since Nov. Canuckle 01:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As Tony Fox says, there are multiple non-trivial references. Then there's no need to waver on the fence. any problems can be dealt with by editing. I added the sources given above to the article, & also his books & journal articles, from World Cat. There are probably more reviews and comments to be found.DGG 04:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; struck my neutral, and now opine Keep as per the additions. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as reliable sources have been found. I've run into similar problems writing articles before, where I haven't been able very many sources for an article, but I can at least find enough to assert notability. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 04:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep For someone with signficant qualifications as an academic historian to be accused, rightly or wrongly, of Holocaust denial is actually quite notable. The Nizkor Project, anti-Holocaust-denial, has some info. on him, I have added a link. PatGallacher 11:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Groupthink G1 ggy! 04:23, 21 May 2007 (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.