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. Additional sources have been offered and unrebutted, with no support for deletion beyond the nomination. (non-admin closure) Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:16, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard J. Baer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Page on someone who is described as a Swiss banker and scientist, although I cannot verify the "banker" part. Except for a short obituary by Erwin Schrödinger I don't see any significant coverage, and even that orbituary is not effusive. Article is very short of inline sources (almost none), and seems to have avoided being flagger for this in NPP. If someone can dig up more information I would be glad to change my opinion, but currently it does not pass WP:NPROF or WP:N. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:38, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, and Switzerland. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:38, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. This article contains a short biography: Singh, Rajinder (2003). "Richard Bär and His Contacts with the Indian Nobel Laureate Sir C.V. Raman" (PDF). Indian Journal of History of Science. 38 (4): 377–387. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:16, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, as a Titularprofessor at Zuerich he meets criterion C5 of WP:NACADEMIC (the policy reason for keeping him); and although we have little information about him, getting an obituary in Nature written by Schroedinger is a pretty solid indication of academic notability in itself. The less policy-related reason to keep him is that our readers have a right to know about the figures who shaped physics during this important period, when information is scant. He's a medium-sized actor in a large-sized drama, and I think our account of the drama would be weaker without him. If we were to delete, I'd want a redirect rather than total deletion, and I can't think where to redirect to. Elemimele (talk) 16:29, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There are enough sources to write an article. There is the article by Singh (above), necrolog at [1] (pp. 60-62). The pages 84-89 in the book by Bieri, Holenstein, and Völk (1990) also presumably discuss him, although I can't confirm it. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 18:23, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Here are also two mentions from Einstein papers: [2][3] Jähmefyysikko (talk) 18:36, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Richard Bär's role in Erwin Schrödinger's flight from Nazi-occupied Austria is mentioned in Moore (1989) Schrödinger, life and thought, pp.341-2. Jagdish Mehra discusses Bär's work in Zurich in Erwin Schrödinger and the rise of wave mechanics (1987), p.284. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 06:56, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I find it hard to believe that someone who is the subject of an obituary in Nature (written by a scientist who is a household name) is not notable. The above sources are helpful. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:41, 19 February 2025 (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.