Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas J. Köstenberger

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The result was speedy Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) -- Dane ^talk 23:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas J. Köstenberger

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I looked for independent reliable sources covering this subject in-depth, but came up empty handed. The best source I could find was only a passing mention in the NYT, in a brief about his daughter's wedding. Everything else appears to be either unreliable or primary sourcing. If other sources can be found, I'd be glad to see them and would withdraw this. But as of now, after my checks, I do not think this should be retained. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bible-related deletion discussions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's absolutely nothing in newspapers.com. I haven't checked JSTOR. Google Books is a difficult search, as he has 1. authored so many books 2. been a consultant on so many books. I've found some publications that seem to be *about* the topic which may or may not be of use. [1], [2], [3], [4]. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for finding those! Some appear to meet the standard for coverage there, but I do not know how reliable those publishers are considered in this context. So, I will leave it up to whoever else reviews this AFD to decide if those can be considered reliable or not. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the user, User:Coffee, I respectively disagree about how he came up empty-handed when looking for sources. There were plenty of sources added to the article from institutions to notable book publishers to news outlets. Just because nothing can be found in NYT is not an adequate reason to claim the article was not sourced properly. There was an adequate number of footnotes and references that showed the information to be reliable. The user, Coffee, even took down information such as institutions Dr. Kostenberger's has attended and taught at. This seems to be an unreasonable measure. I would request that this article not be deleted. Furthermore, I request that my previous version, that is much more accurate and full, be restored. Quinnmosier (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This article is unstable right now. It is hard to get a good idea of exactly what we are supposed to be evaluating. It seems that he almost meets the notability guidelines with these third-party references:[5] [6]. But you need three. If Quinnmosier can find maybe a book review of one of his books published by someone not in his academic institution, then you would be able to demonstrate notability.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 05:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- The article shows that he is a prolific author, and so is notable as such. Theological publications are probably not much covered in the mainstream new media, which may be why the nom found nothing there. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn - I trust the input of Peterkingiron and others as to the reliability of the additional sources found. Therefore, I see no use in keeping this open. Thanks to all who contributed their time! — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 23:43, 18 March 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.