Bryan Derksen said:
It
seems to me based on what I've seen over the past week or two of
this debate that Wollman is both notable and public.
Well that's a judgement call, and we can respectfully disagree on this.
In rebuttal I recall that Wollmann's Wikipedia entry was listed for
deletion in January and it was deleted because the consensus at the time
was that Wollmann was *not* notable. During the discussion those voting
had access to all public documentation, as this was in links from the
article at the time and summarised in the article itself (most of which
was written by me as the original article had been severely POV).