Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerry Bergman

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 delete. Overly, the consensus was to delete (only one weak keep) Nja²⁴⁷ 10:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Bergman

Fails WP:Notability. Despite a lot of attention over several years the only sources for the article are something he wrote himself and a couple of court records of a lawsuit he filed. Steve Dufour (talk) 06:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete He seems to be notable for only being fired from his job and filing a failed lawsuit, which incident hardly registered in the media. Borock (talk) 12:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: does merit a paragraph in The Creationists, but doesn't seem to rise to the top of the pile of self-proclaimed creationist martyrs in terms of over-all coverage. Insufficient reliable secondary-source third-party coverage to merit an article. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 13:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - I have no independent knowledge of this guy (and my only previous edits to this article were related to his connection with Columbia Pacific University), but upon reviewing the article now, looking up sources, and adding a few items to the article, I conclude that he is weakly notable for his criticisms of U.S. academia (for example, see the Toledo Blade article). Although two of his books appear to be self-published and his excellence in writing award is a minor award, the existence of the books and award contribute to notability. --Orlady (talk) 15:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I searched Proquest for other citations. "Jerry Bergman" is a common name, so I'm not sure I found everything. The most notable citations appear to have been two columns on ID printed by Journal - Gazette. Ft. Wayne, Ind. The articles include Bergman's background and instructions on submitting columns, so I'm guessing these were unsolicited. He's quoted at length by the Toledo Blade about the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. And back in 2004 he was quoted at length in The Independent of London about Firpo Carr (and described as Carr's "main enemy") on the topic of Michael Jackson and Jehovah's Witnesses. Will Beback talk 22:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Weak scholarly record. Fails on academic grounds. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Comment - I don't think he deserves to be evaluated as an academic, but rather as an author and/or celebrity-type. Unfortunately, it's easier to be notable as a small-time celebrity than as an academic, but that's a topic for another conversation. --Orlady (talk) 21:09, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sustaining notability as "an author and/or celebrity-type" (would "pundit" be a better term?) would require a solid body of material discussing his claims/opinions in prominent mainstream sources. No solid evidence of such has been presented to date. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 04:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not seem to pass notability requirements under WP:PROF or WP:BIO. Some news coverage, but way short of indicating notability.--Eric Yurken (talk) 01:18, 17 May 2009 (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.