Deletion of Thomas E. Woodward

Comment: The article makes no claims about religious notability, whatever that might be.  He's not a leader of a large sect, one that has been covered extensively in the news media.  He is a scholar with a religious agenda.  As a scholar, he is not notable, per the guidelines at 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: as outlined by the above people, fails both  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment: as failing  per Nsk92
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: The first sentence says he is a professor at a school that grants associates and bachelors degrees.  That is a statement about his academic position.  His being an apologist also signifies that his primary activity is writing and publishing arguments.  Both of these suggest at look at  as the proper guideline.  The ''kind'' of research he does is irrelevant if his primary activity is research
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Not really an academic as such and should be considered under . I looked around and could not find substantial coverage of him by independent reliable sources. Nothing of relevance in GoogleScholarhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Thomas%20E.%20Woodward%22&hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws. GoogleBooks produces a bunch of hits for his namehttp://books.google.com/books?tab=sp&sa=N&q=%22Thomas+E.+Woodward%22&hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N but upon checking closer almost all appear to be false positives (there are some exceptions such as a citation of his book herehttp://books.google.com/books?id=RFYo1rXi70UC&pg=PA303&dq=%22Thomas+E.+Woodward%22&ei=EKyfSJP5K5D0jgHx87D7BA&sig=ACfU3U0di6baesXGhHgya0y7RzX_W6nSuQ and another one herehttp://books.google.com/books?id=L5Y5JZkMIogC&pg=PP10&dq=%22Thomas+E.+Woodward%22&lr=&ei=g6yfSOOmM4_aigHF1rX7BA&sig=ACfU3U2gUrrQ52CRHmohrQ4HrUkJRTf8yQ). Very little in GoogleNews alsohttp://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tab=pn&q=%22Thomas+E.+Woodward%22 (20 hits, all but one are false positives; the single non-false positive is an article by the subject himselfhttp://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-22595677_ITM in Christianity Today). Does not appear to be a sufficinently prominent figure within the intelligent design movement and does not appear to pass 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:BIO)