Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Cooper (linguist)

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 keep. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 06:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Cooper (linguist)[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)

Fails WP:ANYBIO due to lack of significant coverage in reliable, secondary independent sources.

1. https://www.ukwhoswho.com/display/10.1093/ww/9780199540884.001.0001/ww-9780199540884-e-11819 - Primary source = directory listing.

2. https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/fellows/robin-cooper-FBA/ - non independent source because they are a member of this academy.

Fails WP:NACADEMIC because they don't hold a named chair or a distinguished professor appointment. Plus, WP:POKEMON asks the question, does Wikipedia need an entry for every member of this academy? Some of these humanities people are notable, but many aren't so it seems like the author has applied the pokemon test in the inverse. Signal Crayfish (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, clearly passes WP:PROF as he is a Fellow of the British Academy, which is inherently notable. Wikipedia isn't harmed by having these articles. CoconutOctopus talk 18:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep WP:SK3. FBA is clearly a pass of WP:PROF#C3. Likely to pass other WP:PROF criteria (because FBA) but a detailed examination would be a waste of time. Nominator should stop their spree of (at least four) pointy and bad nominations of FBAs, or be made to stop. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: WP:Pokémon test is not a serious argument for deletion. Whether the subject of this article is less "notable" than "an average Pokémon" is entirely subjective and has no factual basis. It's just a way of saying WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I don't think I've ever seen someone invoke that argument in multiple AfDs before. This is bad practice. Toughpigs (talk) 20:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Both FBA and having a festschrift are clear passes of NPROF.

JoelleJay (talk) 22:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Satisfies WP:PROF as a Fellow of the British Academy: [1]. James500 (talk) 08:39, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies WP:NPROF and WP:ANYBIO as an FBA. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's quite obvious from the article that he is notable. Athel cb (talk) 21:31, 6 February 2024 (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.