Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Parkes

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Parkes[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Potentially notable associate professor. [1] [2]. scope_creep^Talk 15:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:45, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There was a Robert J. Parkes who published US history books in the 1970s that might have enough reviews for WP:AUTHOR, but the dates and topics don't match, so I'm pretty sure it's a different person. This one has enough publications with double-digit citations in Google Scholar to reach an h-index of 12 or so, but that's not enough to convince me of a pass of WP:PROF#C1. And I don't see any other claim of notability in the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:43, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. First off, this is a c.v., not an article, and everybody knows (as of 2021) that we have never been a resume hosting service such as LinkedIn. Secondly, under WP:PROF, we almost never include associate professors, absent some important reason (discrimination against a female/POC scholar, recent discovery, etc.). Sorry. Bearian (talk) 17:22, 3 March 2021 (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.