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. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 08:58, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

G. Thompson Brown (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)

I am also nominating the following related pages:

John Azumah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Rodger Nishioka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Sara Myers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

These people linked in various ways to Columbia Theological Seminary appear to fail to meet WP:NACADEMICS, as discussed with the articles' creator at User:Jcstanley/my articles. There are other biographies listed there that may also fail our notability guidelines, but these are the ones that there seemed to be agreement on regarding lack of notability. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:18, 12 April 2016 (UTC

Comment -- Cordless Larry -- can we break these up into separate AfDs? They are related in that they're from the same university/school, but the arguments for keeping or deleting each one of them are likely to be different from the others; I've usually seen grouped AfDs in cases where it's obvious that someone would generally vote the same way for all articles for the same reason, such as someone made nearly identical stub articles about each of a minor band's 8 albums, or about all 9 of a city's elementary schools, as opposed to people who happened to work together but who have very different careers (for instance, my quick gut instinct would be delete, delete, weak keep, keep). Thanks! -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 13:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think I misunderstood your comment that "it'd be courteous to do it in small batches (2-3 at a time)" at User:Jcstanley/my articles, Mscuthbert. I initially thought that you meant that they should be grouped, but perhaps you meant that they should be individually nominated two or three at a time? Cordless Larry (talk) 14:04, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right - they should be separate. Give me a few minutes and I'll fix this. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:06, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. In retrospect, a bundled nomination wasn't appropriate in this case. My apologies. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see why you thought I meant doing them together. My mistake. I meant that it'd be courteous not to nominate all 20+ researchers at the same time, so we could figure out which could be handled w/ PROD, which needed AfD, and which shouldn't be nominated. Thanks! -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 15:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - this is a very difficult, borderline case. He has some of the markings that say, "duh, keep" such as an honorary doctorate (international even) and having his papers collected and organized by a library. Those are generally keep. But the honorary doctorate is from an institution that is very small (Honam Theological University and Seminary) and the library housing his papers is his own school's library. So they count only for a bit. Director of International Mission for the Presbyterian Church is probably the biggest claim to the impact in discipline of theology). Full Keep based on Atlanta Journal Constitution staff obituary. Staff obituaries in major papers fulfill notability requirements. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 15:10, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  (It's unfortunate that such independent verification of influence only happens after death) -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk)

• Keep The obituary puts him clearly into the notable column.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:15, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - As I'm still uncertain, I'm asking DGG for analysis here. SwisterTwister talk 04:35, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Unquestioned keep--full professors at major universities are almost always notable, and certainly are if they have written multiple books by major publishers in their subject. This would also meet NAUTHOR. DGG ( talk ) 04:50, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • In bringing this article to AfD, DGG, I was guided by your comment that "Emeritus is not notable, and the other position is not enough for notability either". See User:Jcstanley/my_articles#G. Thompson Brown. If you've changed your mind, that's fine, but I am a bit confused by your insistence that professors are almost always notable given your earlier comments. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:24, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed my mind on this one. Emeritus is indeed not proof of notability ; I judge him notable on the basis ofthe books, which I may not have given sufficient weight to earlier. DGG ( talk ) 07:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On the books, is there evidence that these have had an impact on the discipline? I can see that he has published several, but it's not clear to me that that fact in itself establishes notability. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as DGG himself has now suggested Delete because of the professorship. I am also suggesting Delete now as this still seems questionable overall. Draft or Userfy if someone needs it, SwisterTwister talk 04:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• SwisterTwister -- I'm confused on the reasoning here; DGG has voted Keep. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 07:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - one of the "Presbyterian Church’s foremost experts on world Christianity". StAnselm (talk) 10:14, 27 April 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.