Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tahir Musa Ceylan

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. The consensus is that the subject is not yet notable. Should notability arise in the future, then it can be recreated with suitable independent reliable sources PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:00, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tahir Musa Ceylan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Article that is not about its subject; uses self published sources; and is mostly an essay about psychology.\ c y m r u . l a s s ^{(talk me, stalk me)} 01:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Danger (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Danger (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Possible Keep of introductory paragraph only, which explains about the person. He seems to be important enough, the sources are hard to judge however. Delete the long essays about his theories, but have links to his writings if they are available. Steve Dufour (talk) 02:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. I've come to pretty much the same conclusions as Steve Dufour (talk · contribs) above. We should certainly lose the long essays, but there should be better independent references available. Having said that, I have struggled to find any. Someone who reads Turkish might be able to help here. --Deskford (talk) 03:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now changing to delete. I can find no reliable sources to verify anything beyond the existence of one or more books. The articles on the French, German and Turkish Wikipedias don't help (though I don't read Turkish). Comment below by 212.175.14.114 (talk · contribs) suggests the subject may become notable in future but does not yet meet our criteria. --Deskford (talk) 16:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Article must not be deleted to my way of thinking, it is a new and important thought in neuro/psychophilosophy. You are right it is written in an essay format, in course of time it may be written encyclopedic format, or it may be hiden at any other place in Wikipedia and may be linked tok Tahir Musa Ceylan's page, if it is possible. And it has some independent sources, but they are preapering to publish, after that they will be put at suitable places —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.175.14.114 (talk) 12:45, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. IP 212.175.14.114, who appears to be knowledgeable about the subject, asserts facts that would strongly indicate the subject is not yet notable: that these are new thoughts about which independent sources have yet to publish any coverage. The importance of the thoughts and the significance of hoped-for coverage remain to be seen. (Does anybody else find it odd that the only explicit claim of notability in the article is alleged selection for a high school reading list?) ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not deleted it is a useful article and has references good enough —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.175.14.114 (talk) 14:25, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 22:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article may be corrected, but it needs the time — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.102.252.97 (talk) 05:02, 19 February 2011 — 85.102.252.97 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Acather96 (talk) 12:18, 20 February 2011 (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.