Deletion of Philip Ehrlich

Comment: The citation counts are not actually bad for such a low-citation subject but they become much less impressive when one realizes that two of the top five listed in Google Scholar are edited volumes and one more is an erratum. A few reviews for a couple of edited volumes don't count for much, certainly not enough for . And there seems to be nothing else
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: To evaluate someone who works in the philosophy of mathematics, I'd look for book reviews first, and a few do exist https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.rml/1081878082https://www.jstor.org/stable/687952https://www.jstor.org/stable/2348157, but his two books were co-edited collections rather than treatises he authored himself. I'd hesitate to call that the kind of "body of work" that |the notability guideline for authors asks for. Nor does it seem like those two co-edited collections attracted more than a baseline level of attention. I'm not seeing prestigious awards or journal editorships, either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)