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The result was withdrawn by nominator Enigma^msg 20:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Mandel[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:ARTIST or WP:PROF. An orphan for over a year. Doc Quintana (talk) 23:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references. See these references from The New York Times: http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00813F83B5C1A7493C2AB178AD95F458785F9 and http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0A15FA38551A7493CAAB178FD85F478785F9 - Eastmain (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems to meet WP:N. There are also articles in the LA Times which seem to cover him. (I'm unable to view the links to the LAT from Gnews for some reason). Hobit (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll withdraw after the Times links. Doc Quintana (talk) 02:39, 5 January 2010 (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.