Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brook Ziporyn
or possibly userfy). As noted above I think there are enough different in-depth reviews of enough of his books to pass  (an easier bar than #C1 but one that makes more sense for an area of academia where progress is measured in books rather than scientific papers). In particular, those who have subscription access can see the following reviews that I found through a Google scholar search (and which should be used to source the material about his books in our article): http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021911804001251 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0922.2009.01373_9.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021911813002027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S002191180500238X http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6253.2012.01707.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1356186302410152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/pew.2011.0018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfi036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/cri.2009.0019 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25075915 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23733543 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4145776 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23733009 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4126587 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4133414 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4139909 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1399866 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4139908 (there is some overlap between the jstor ones and the others, so this is not quite as many links as it looks like, but still plenty
— User:David, 01:25, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:AUTHOR||WP:PROF (Wikipedia:Notability)