Deletion of John Feinberg

Comment: I don't see how this satisfies . H-index is 9, by my count, but that's still very low. On the other hand, he's written several books. I'd also point out that the deletion nomination is off-beam: it's  (and specifically  and ) that's important here. -- Special:Contributions/202.124.73.47|202.124.73.47
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:N||WP:PROF||WP:AUTH)

Comment: sourced have been added, and are still being added. This seems like it may have been a hasty nomination. The h-index sounds low, but probably isn't for the subject area. #C6 may also apply here, if the Evangelical Philosophical Society can be considered a "major academic society". (There is a notability tag on that article, but it publishes a peer reviewed journal and is possibly the only society of its kind
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: per . The nominator may wish to review  and , particularly since contrary to their nomination the article has been http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Feinberg&oldid=512246976 referenced (albeit with primary sources) since its creation
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:POINT||WP:BEFORE)

Comment: Per , "Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars ... are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources." Since Feinberg is often cited as an expert in theodicy and ethics, this article should stand on the merit of his work
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: per ''''''. Topic notability is not based upon whether or not sources are in articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NRVE)