Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G.C. Dilsaver
Thank you for providing more sources... I've looked through all of the ones you provided, but I still don't think he qualifies under .  4 clearly does not apply. For 3, none of his writings would be considered significant enough to be on Wikipedia, so that's out. For 2, he may have created a new concept or theory, but again, I'm missing the significance piece. Which leads us to 1, but here's actually where Google scholar is insightful: in none of your searches do we get past the first page of results. For academics or for people who influence academic works, I'd expect this to be in at least the hundreds. I'll walk away from this discussion now
— User:SportingFlyer, 19:03, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:AUTHOR (Wikipedia:Notability)