| Revision as of 14:54, 19 October 2007 editWstaffor (talk | contribs)179 edits →Richard H. Holm← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:12, 19 October 2007 edit undoItub (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers10,488 edits →Richard H. Holm: Speedy KeepNext edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| :*This AfD nomination was ]. It is listed now. ] 13:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | :*This AfD nomination was ]. It is listed now. ] 13:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Speedy Keep''' Clearly passes ]. Articles are not deleted just because they are not complete. ]<sub >]</sub> 14:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | *'''Speedy Keep''' Clearly passes ]. Articles are not deleted just because they are not complete. ]<sub >]</sub> 14:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Speedy Keep''' per all of the above. What is the rush to delete a two-day old article on a notable topic before giving time for people to add sources? --] 16:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:12, 19 October 2007
Richard H. Holm
- Richard H. Holm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
This article does not assert notability and has no cited references. Illinois2011 18:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep — subject won award. Meets WP:PROF, specifically criterion 6.--Agüeybaná 21:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —David Eppstein 04:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong keep. Named chair at Harvard. Member of and award from the National Academy of Sciences. Highly cited papers. Honorary degree from U. Chicago. Very clear pass of WP:PROF. —David Eppstein 04:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep as per David Eppstein. Why has this even been nominated? --Crusio 07:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep He is a notable scientist. We can find references. He is a notable chemist. Masterpiece2000 13:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep Clearly passes WP:PROF. Articles are not deleted just because they are not complete. Wstaffortalk 14:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep per all of the above. What is the rush to delete a two-day old article on a notable topic before giving time for people to add sources? --Itub 16:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)