The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.
The result was delete.
Mz7 (
talk) 21:07, 6 March 2017 (UTC)reply
On reflection, I am going to express my opinion that this article be deleted - it does not appear that the subject of the article meets
WP:PROF, and further discussion suggests this article may actually be a joke created by one of his colleagues.
Yunshui雲水 10:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. I support deletion of articles for people of marginal notability when the subject requests it.-gadfium 19:08, 28 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment I've given the article a once-over but will not voice an opinion on whether it should be kept.
Stuartyeates (
talk) 10:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete -- Per nom and Gadfium. --
Shuddetalk 20:54, 3 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete Fails SIGCOV. No evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
DerbyCountyinNZ(
TalkContribs) 00:07, 4 March 2017 (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.