Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luc Langlois

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. RL0919 (talk) 00:21, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Luc Langlois (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)

This entry does not meet the criteria of Wikipedia concerning the notability of academics or writers. He is not well known in philosophy and none of his works have been reviewed by philosophers in the media. The sources are poor or dead and do not display his notability. Therefore, I nominate this entry for deletion Sintiya (talk) 18:19, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I did not find any review on his works. So, I conclude that he is not notable.Amidewiki (talk) 20:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment This discussion page was created without the {{afd2}} template and never transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now--I have no opinion on the nomination itself at this time. @Sintiya: If you wish to nominate other articles for deletion in the future, please fully follow the procedures at WP:AFDHOWTO. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 15:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. --Finngall ^talk 15:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. --Finngall ^talk 15:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. --Finngall ^talk 15:04, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 15:07, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:ACADEMIC as the past president of the Canadian Philosophical Association. TJMSmith (talk) 15:08, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There appears to be at least a decent argument for WP:PROF#C2 (the Ordre des Palmes académiques), #C6 (past president of the Canadian Philosophical Association) and #C8 (Francophone editor of Dialogue). XOR'easter (talk) 17:38, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Although his citations do not indicate that his ideas have been so influential, Dialogue appears to be a well-established journal, and he appears to have been co-chief editor. That looks like WP:NPROF C8. The WP:NPROF C2 argument also looks solid. Beyond that, I find the C6 argument pretty plausible, and his citations (while not a C1 pass) are not bad. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 22:45, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: on the balance of things. In addition to the above points, there's a plausible pass at WP:NAUTHOR with books published by university presses. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:46, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I don't think the case for WP:PROF#C1 or WP:AUTHOR are strong, but C2, C6, and C8 all look like passes. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:20, 20 January 2020 (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.