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, subject clears meets the criterias of WP:PROF, and was notable before the recent tragic event at Virginia. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 04:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Liviu Librescu[edit]

Liviu Librescu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

WP:NOT a memorial. DXRAW 04:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah! Delete, because I can't stand the idea that Wikipedia might be helpful to a reader seeking information on Prof. What's-his-face. Make 'em go somewhere else to learn; Wikipedia is WP:NOT supposed to be informative. (edit conflict) Uggh 04:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - this individual is unquestionably notable and should have had an article even before the tragedy. Take a look at his CV - http://www.esm.vt.edu/~llibresc/RESUME%20L.%20Librescu.pdf. He has published countless books and papers. More importantly, he was frequently cited in others' published works. He was notable before the shootings and is moreso now. --BigDT 04:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep - Meets Notable Criteria, no grouds for deletion... 76.109.163.61

• Speedy Keep Notable in life and highly notable in death. IMO this should be speedily closed, SqueakBox 04:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I agree with the nominator and think that most biography articvles for victims should probably not be included, however I also agree with BigDT, he is notable for inclusion based on his list of published works alone. Dalf | Talk 04:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - Significant individual in wider news item. InSpace 04:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - Eminently notable. htom 04:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep - already notable before death, all the more so now. Tommythegun 04:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep - I agree with BigDT; this is not a memorial of a departed friend/relative, as was indicated on the "What Wikipedia is not" page. This information is relevant to the Virginia Tech shootings, and I think that it should be kept. Thanks BlueStarz 04:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Clearly notable. — MichaelLinnear 04:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep Meets WP:PROF. Yaf 04:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - Read the article, and then read the related policies (in this case, WP:PROF#Criteria). Saying it should be deleted because it's a memorial is almost borderline as bad faith. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 04:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - Clearly notable, papers cited over 1000 times and expert in his field. Should have had article before death. Very prolific writer: had 110 chapters in books published and 246 articles published in journals. Also, his death is getting more press since he was deemed a "hero" by many for blocking the door. -Bluedog423^Talk 04:43, 18 April 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.