Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Sandner

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The result was keep — withdrawn by nominator, no !votes to delete. XOR'easter (talk) 18:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

David Sandner

[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)

Does not appear to be notable. I only found this single RS review of his work, and this, page 185, 32 of the PDF which is quasi reliable, in context. No WP:SIGCOV that I can find, although he was reached for commentary about someone's work being disallowed from a conference.[1] That's about all I can dig up, but I would be pleased if other sources exist. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:08, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and California. Shellwood (talk) 19:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment More reviews of the subject's nonfiction books include [2][3][4] and reviews of an edited volume include [5][6][7]. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 12:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Publishers Weekly also reviewed in brief the same coauthored novel as locusmag at [8]. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 12:25, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I cleaned up the article. I think just the reviews listed here are enough for WP:AUTHOR, but I found and added a few more. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Now plenty of reviews for WP:NAUTHOR. Critical Discourses of the Fantastic appears to have had particular impact. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 22:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If I knew how to withdraw all nice and neat I would. There's probably a good script for that. Thanks for digging up the sources. I guess count me as keep now. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:14, 6 April 2022 (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.