Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leopold Z. Goldstein

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. ✗plicit 00:48, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Leopold Z. Goldstein

[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)

NN bio - fails WP:NPROF UtherSRG (talk) 16:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and United States of America. UtherSRG (talk) 16:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:06, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appears to be a notable academic from the pre-Internet era. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:29, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Has about 10 papers in Pubmed, using the sourcing given in the article. Would appear notable, but wow it needs a TNT or at least a rewrite.

Oaktree b (talk) 01:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per Oaktree b and Eastmain. I think there might just be enough for WP:PROF here. JML1148 (talk | contribs) 07:37, 14 June 2023 (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.