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. postdlf (talk) 23:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Christos Trikalinos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This page was previously nominated for deletion in 2005 because of concerns about notability. The article has not been expanded in the intervening years and contains no references, which appear to be difficult to find. In particular, I have not been able to locate any accounts of the subject's scientific work, apart from original journal articles. It was mentioned in the previous discussion that the subject was president of the Greek national federation of university professors (POSDEP), but I have only been able to find two brief mentions of this in the press. Will Orrick (talk) 02:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Sailsbystars (talk) 04:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per WP:BIO. Monterey Bay (talk) 04:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Only minimal on GS. Not enough for WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:41, 19 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]
• Keep. Not invisible on Greek Google. Have added a couple of references (including a University and the BBC). Meets general notability as the president of a national federation of teachers.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 11:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Nipson - non-English sources exist. –SJ+ 18:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very little evidence of impact on physics scholarship. Of the order of 1000 citations are usually needed for a keep for scientists. There are few here. Please identify the 29 papers published in international journals. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

As far as I can tell, the BBC article is about the same as the two English-language sources I found: it contains one quote by the subject acting as a spokesman for his organization, but doesn't provide much information on which to base a biographical article about the man himself. At best it corroborates that he was chairman of a federation of academic staff, but I am doubtful that this is sufficient for inclusion in Wikipedia. As for his university web page, this does not distinguish him from the hundreds of thousands of other academics with similar pages. Will Orrick (talk) 23:09, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the English-language sources, so that non-Greek speakers can better judge. Will Orrick (talk) 03:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Existence ≠ Notability, and the sources found so far establish only his existence. I see no evidence that he passes WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Doesn't need to pass WP:PROF since he already passes General Notability as the President of a national federation of teachers.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 01:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:GNG has no "president of a national federation of teachers" clause. WP:PROF maybe does if you could establish the importance of this national federation. What WP:GNG does require is nontrivial coverage in multiple reliably-published third-party sources. It's essential to have something we can say about the subject that we can verify by looking at the sources, and currently we don't have anything about him that is properly sourced in that way: we have only his self-published faculty profile and a couple of news stories that quote him but don't say anything about him. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Have added more references from Kathimerini (top newspaper in Greece) and from Greek Sky TV's online publication Skai.gr. Multiple reliable third-party news sources meets WP:GNG with ease. There are also multiple references at Greek government websites where P.O.S.D.E.P. interfaces with the Greek government (do I really need to start listing those as well?). Here is the official website of P.O.S.D.E.P.. Have also added a reference to a publication of a national conference organised by the Ministry of Education where he represented P.O.S.D.E.P. as its president.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 13:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm still not convinced. The new sources still only mention him trivially (as a source for a quote, or with a single line stating that he was elected to the post) or not at all (the last one, from Oct 2004). At this point, number of sources is not what's needed to pass WP:GNG, it's rather the depth of coverage within the sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Here is an article with his name in the title. The entire article is dedicated to the opinion of Christos Trikalinos and the organisation that he represents. Χ.Τρικαλινός:Οι προτάσεις Παπανδρέου για την παιδεία υποκρύπτουν τεράστιους κινδύνους.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 01:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • It still doesn't actually say much about him. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Multiple reliable sources, even if they are not in-depth, are still more than adequate to meet WP:GNG. I have supplied references from four excellent newspapers, two radio stations (one Greek and one British), a television station (Greek Sky) (two articles including one dedicated to Christos Trikalinos), and the Greek Ministry of Education. More than adequate to meet WP:GNG (and some).  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 10:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Xxanthippe and David Epstein. Does not meet WP:PROf or WP:GNG (only trivial in-passing mentions). --Crusio (talk) 10:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hang on a second. Xxanthippe placed a comment before I introduced several references that easily qualify for WP:GNG and there appears to be nothing that I can do to satisfy Eppstein. Xxanthippe should reconsider position.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 13:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I've been watching the article and the debate from the start and I'm in agreement with David Eppstein. From WP:BASIC: trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. All of the sources given are quotes from Trikalinos. Not one independent of the subject gives any information beyond his name and title. Furthermore, being the head of a union of scholars is not the same as being a member of a major academic body, so I don't think he qualifies for inclusion under WP:PROF criteria 3 either. Sailsbystars (talk) 13:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete meets neither WP:GNG (lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources) nor WP:PROF (1 paper does not make an academic career) RadioFan (talk) 13:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be honest, I had not even bothered to look at WP:PROF because he easily meets WP:GNG. But now you come to mention it. He actually meets WP:PROF too. Item 6 in WP:PROF is "The person has held a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society". And he has as the President of P.O.S.D.E.P.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 14:23, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Being head of POSDEP, which is concerned with employment conditions for academics, does not establish notability as a scholar in the way that being president of a university or head of a major academic society would, so WP:PROF doesn't apply. I am not sure what Wikipedia's standards are for inclusion of heads of labor unions, but it seems untenable to try to maintain biographies of every past president of every national federation of every profession. In my opinion, the main problem with over-broad criteria for inclusion is that secondary sources simply aren't available on which to base a substantive biography. A bio page can languish for years with few or no editors watching or updating it, and with nobody able or willing to assess the accuracy and significance of its content. Will Orrick (talk) 15:50, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • POSDEP has a far wider role than "employment conditions for academics" you only have to look at a translation of the POSDEP website to see that. CLICK HERE to see a translation.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 19:08, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Fair enough. But there's an enormous difference between between a learned society and a professional organization, which is what POSTDEP looks like to me. Item 6 in WP:PROF specifies leadership of a "notable national or international scholarly society". Will Orrick (talk) 02:50, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • It's not a "professional organisation" . It's an organisation that discusses and lobbies for the best interests of education (by scholars). He also organized the 1st Panhellenic Physics Education Congress in Greece. 1ο Πανελληνιο Εκπαιδευτικό Συνεδριο Φυσικών for the Union of Greek Physicists eefthes.gr  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 20:27, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 15:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Article seems to have met WP:GNG requirements.Deyyaz ^{[ Talk | Contribs ]} 05:05, 22 March 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.