Deletion of Ned Polsky

Comment: An interesting thing about #3 is that it does not specify "book". Polsky is an easy pass of #3 because he created two works (''Hustlers'' and the Mailer essay) that were separately significant, well-known, and discussed in multiple periodicals. The rest of the coverage he received is bonus
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR||WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: Looks like a familiar thing: old article that needs an upgrade.  this prof (of sociology or criminology) had a real footprint back in the day.  In his case, the 60s.  quite a lot of stuff turned up in a quick proquest newspaper archive search of the title of his book and his surname.  I added 2 book reviews, and am out of time.  But I do think it will be a keep.  A willing editor without access to news archives might try searching for significant coverage in books. Also, do we have a list of pool-related deletions?   Returned, ran the title of his book thorugh JSTOR search , added half a dozen academic journal book reviews.  Sails past .  Page is still paltry, but I suggest that we keep it instead a redirect to his notable book.  Reason is: he must have been born somewhere, gotten his PhD somewhere, been on the faculty somewhere and perhaps bred up a generation of young criminologists.  He may well have written other notable stuff.   So, just KEEP and hope an editor comes along to improve it.  sourcing with book reviews
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR||WP:HEYMANN)