Katrin Kneipp: I originally created this article as I believed them to be notable due to Fellowship of the APS and high citation count.  Kj cheetham ( talk ) 15:58, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 P.S. My own view is this shouldn't be deleted.  - Kj cheetham ( talk ) 17:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women .  Kj cheetham ( talk ) 15:58, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science , Germany ,  and Massachusetts .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 16:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Too notable to delete.  She appears to have retired.  In terms of privacy concerns, neither the article nor Wikidata show a date place of birth, name of spouse or where she now lives.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 17:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * Hold .  It needs to be confirmed that E. Rumpelstilzchen is Katrin Kneipp.  If it is then we must delete the page.  I know several people in SERS so I will ask what her status is (offline from Wikipedia).  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 03:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC) Ldm1954 ( talk ) 09:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I, Harald Kneipp, use 'Rumpelstilzchen'.  I am Katrin Kneipp's husband.  We dont want appear in Wikipedia.  E. Rumpelstilzchen ( talk ) 14:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Then that's a done deal, if not the way you might want.  Presuming that you are who you say you are -- and any rando on the Internet can make any such claim -- you are not Katrin Kneipp herself.   Even in legitimate BLPREQUESTDELETE cases, such requests from third parties are not considered.  Ravenswing 20:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep regardless of subject preferences.  No, there is no necessity of deleting pages based only on subject demands.  WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE is only for borderline cases.  APS Fellow is not borderline; it is a clear pass of WP:PROF#C3 .  Her citation record also gives a strong pass of WP:PROF#C1 , far from borderline for that criterion.  I think we should have articles on all female APS Fellows.  Allowing subject preferences to stand (regardless of their legitimacy) would put an unfixable gap in our coverage.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Eppstein ( talk • contribs ) Keep: Leaving aside that there are many people who'd love to wipe clean biographies they themselves can't curate, I agree that this isn't a borderline case, and there's no evidence to suggest that this is really the subject.   In any event, people who are resolute in keeping out of the public eye probably ought not publish research papers bearing their names, or give interviews.  Ravenswing 13:55, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep under the assumption that the requester is not Katrin Kneipp herself, or someone with a full power of attorney (due to illness or similar).  The evidence above indicates that this is not the case.  (I have changed my vote after evidence for who posted the request has been provided.  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 09:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] My opinion for the record.  If this was by the subject or an authorized representative (which a husband alone is not) then provided there was nothing contraversial in the page, the deletion request should be honored.  The topic of Right to privacy is not simple, neither is Right to be forgotten .  Independent of these a person should have the right to correct erroneous information about themselves and have it removed.  I recognize that not everyone will agree with this position, but to me it does not matter how notable they are, this right exists during their lifetime.  To me this is a question of morality beyond Wikipedia.  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 09:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Although clearly notable there is sufficient evidence for WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE to apply.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 01:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Wait until situation is clearer.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 10:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] I admit confusion.  To what evidence to you allude?  The subject of the article has not been heard from, the subject's husband would have no unilateral right to request deletion, we have no evidence that User:E.  Rumpelstilzchen IS the subject's husband, and in any event we've not heard from him in a week.  Surely we're not deleting articles on the unsupported say-sos of SPAs.  Ravenswing 06:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep