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 of the debate was Keep (8k, 1d). --Scimitar ^parley 16:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NN fan/scholarcruft D Pwqn 19:58, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Huh? You created this article off of 1911 encyclopedia, and then say its "Scholarcruft"? --MacRusgail 20:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I have the same question as MacRusgail. You created this article from the 1911 Britannica. Why are you nominating it for deletion? please explain.--Alhutch 20:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Of course I can't speak for 1911EB editors, but '"Apollonius the Sophist" 'gets only a few Google hits. The only people who will ever care about this guy are Greek scholars who do not need a Wikipedia article. Pwqn 20:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia has entries of even more historically "obscure" people... - Skysmith 08:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious keep. If it was good enough for the EB in 1911, it is good enough for Wikipedia today. Google is an aid for pop culture and contemporary stuff, but should not ultimately determine notability in other cases. Uppland 21:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - if there are only a few Google hits, it's all the more important to keep this article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by BeteNoir (talk • contribs) UTC21:50, 26 October 2005
• Keep of course. Pity he didn´t blog ;-) Ejrrjs | What? 23:46, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few additions. Here (in Spanish) Apollonius is quoted on the etymology of nectar (page 153). Ejrrjs | What? 00:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. A prime example of how not everything that is significant shows up on Google. -- Captain Disdain 00:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because I didn't vote before and per Uppland's reasoning.--Alhutch 00:23, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - There is even a project to include all 1911EB acticles - Wikipedia:1911 Encyclopedia topics - Skysmith 08:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• He has an entry in L'Emprière's. The WP:BIO criteria are satisfied. Keep. Uncle G 11:52, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - anyone remembered hundreds of years after their death must be reasonably notable. Agree with 1911 comments. Apollonius' name will probably still be known (vaguely somewhere) when Pokemon has died a death. --MacRusgail 16:39, 27 October 2005 (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.