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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Jfire (talk) 19:07, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Vogel (historian)[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)

~~I couldn't find reliable sources to show he meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. German and French Wikipedia have many references. He has won awards and is a member of learned societies. Passes WP:NPROF easily. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:52, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in-depth coverage in reliable sources such as [1] and [2] ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. First things I do for info are check the article in the subject's native language and a good faith Google search, both produced sources for notability under WP:PROF. Spagooder (talk) 16:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although WP:PROF can sometimes be problematic for people in the humanities and from pre-internet times, it seems to be working ok in this case. Member of Leopoldina (from the French article) passes WP:PROF#C3, and I think the George Sarton Medal passes #C2. And the French version also lists plenty of in-depth and reliably published sources specifically about Vogel, so he also passes WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Undoubtedly notable. Per all the above. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw nomination per good points above. If anyone has sources they trust, please consider adding them to the article. Boleyn (talk) 18:07, 6 January 2024 (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.