Deletion of Frank L. Lambert

Comment: People have said that there is a significant amount of evidence for FLL's impact on the way entropy is taught and thus that he qualified by rule #4 of . My only problem is... where is this evidence? At this moment there are 8 citations of this in the lead. However, if we examine the sources closely. Citation 1 is a broken link to a CV, citations 2-7 are publications of FLL, most of them with him as sole author, and citation 8 is original research. It is clear that FLL works and promotes viewing entropy in this alternative way, but it is not at all clear that this has had a major impact on how entropy is taught at most universities. If someone can find several credible sources (that are not original research, or FLL's publications) then I will change my vote. (Also, Ray Eston Smith Jr... chill... you have made your point, you are starting to look a bit hostile
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: There is sufficient evidence in the literature that he has had a significant influence in how entropy is taught and thereby passes #C4. The nominator seems mainly to be arguing that Lambert's ideas are wrong, but this is irrelevant for determining whether they are notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: The issue here is whether the subject passes . Probably yes on criterion #4, if the case can be made a little more clearly
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: I'm inclined to think this one passes , and any need for revision per nom's complaints does not really constitute an argument for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)