Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flaudette May V. Datuin

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:10, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Flaudette May V. Datuin[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:PROF.

No evidence of significant impact in her academic area.
No highly prestigious academic award.
Not elected to a prestigious body.
No indication that her work has had a significant impact in higher education.
Not held a chairmanship.
Not a high-ranking administrative official.
No non-academic notability (WP:NAUTHOR).
Ctrl+P isn't a "well-established academic journal". It's just a run of the mill publication.
See point 7.

She fails WP:GNG due to the lack of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources.

The article is also written in a non-encyclopedic tone.

DrStrauss talk 14:31, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:55, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:56, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:56, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Datuin fails all notability guidelines for academics. Beyond this, the article is a horrible case of coatracking. It is really about the journal she is connected with. That journal might be notable, but that would be a different article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 08:23, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete analysis by nom shows she definitely fails WP:PROF. LibStar (talk) 13:13, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A GS h-index of 3 is far WP:Too soon for WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:22, 8 September 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Delete per nom. Falls way short of WP:PROF and I can't find anything else that would suggest notability. – Joe (talk) 12:34, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I am sympathetic, but her art hasn't even been shown at the Metropolitan Museum of Manila nor internationally. Her only cited show is in a government tourist trap. Associate professors generally do not pass the PROF test. Bearian (talk) 23:16, 9 September 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.