Deletion of Uwe Kils (2nd nomination)

Comment: see below) due to winning the Heinz_Maier-Leibnitz-Preis award and inventing the EcoSCOPE, those seem to fit point #2 and #1 of , respectively. (I saw the discussion at ANI
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: The -tagged accounts all appear to be affiliated with the professor, most have few edits outside of userspace, and many have been inactive since 2005, suggesting that they were recently recruited.  Most of the arguments presented simply regurgitate the article; I see very little that actually address 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:PROF)

Comment: I'm not impressed by the quality of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uwe Kils|the previous discussion. The deletes are mostly "vanity" and "non-notable" without any elaboration and the keeps are mostly "verifiable" and "notable" without any elaboration. It looks more like a vote than a discussion. I think that, rather than relying on precedent, we should come to a fresh consensus on whether he passes 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)