Deletion of Klemens Fischer

Comment: without prejudice against recreation if somebody without a |conflict of interest can do better. I can't read German, so I'm not equipped to determine whether he has enough coverage in |reliable sources to clear  — but this is written like a résumé rather than an encyclopedia article, is based entirely on |primary sources (his own staff profiles on the self-published websites of his own employers, etc.) rather than reliable ones, and is stating nothing about him that counts as "inherently" notable enough to make it necessary to keep an article that's written and sourced this badly. And the German article, as written, isn't any better — it's following exactly the same format (the English one is literally a straight translation of it, in fact) and citing exactly the same primary sources, and should rightly be deleted on DE too. If a German speaker can do ''better'', be my guest
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES)

Comment: Pure promotional article. If he's notable, we can  and recreate, but none of the sources pass . Not convinced on the , or that being an honorary professor would convey notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:GNG||WP:NPROF)

Comment: without prejudice towards recreation in the future if an editor can prove notability and write in a non-promotionial manner, but the current sources don't demonstrate that  is passed. Best
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)