Just a point for discussion. The definition of unicorn is less akin to that of a God than one may think. God is often more lossely defined (perhaps, this is why when referring to the dieties of specific religions, we are more quick to dismiss their existance). The existance of unicorns is more so indefensible due to the high level of specificity in definition. To understand the object enhances its dismissibility (or, believeability, should their be supporting evidence for the case). But then again, consider their likeness to horses. What are the qualities of "unicorn"? Of "God"?
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.
If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Professor Engel is not notable, he has not contributed notable contributions or publications to the community of philosophy. He is merely an animal rights and vegan activist. He has not appeared in any current news outside of his own community. Professor Engel is not contributor to any regular publication, this is why this article needs to be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjb1015 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Once again this article is not notable and I do not understand why the wikipedia community comes out and supports this individual when this article is (1. poorly cited/no main stream reliable sources, 2. a clear attempt to market ones self, 3. completely not notable whatsoever, 4. this individual is not referenced in other articles(eg. Northern Arizona Alumni, Northern Illinois University, Vegan, etc.) (Pjb1015 (talk) 05:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC))
I agree wholeheartedly. There is no way this individual meets the criteria, say, of WP:PROF. He has mainly published in second class journals. He is just about average, at best. Compare, for instance, the reasonably recently deleted entry for Peter J. King! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 08:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)