Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scot Brown
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Sandstein 23:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Scot Brown (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Subject does not meet the notability requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (people). No evidence this associate professor has been the subject of non-trivial coverage by multiple, reliable, published sources. Contested PROD, so comes here. — Satori Son 13:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Just another professor. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- Pete.Hurd (talk) 17:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I added some references. --Eastmain (talk) 18:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. While he has some record of publication, it does not amount to more than any other associate professor. One book and a couple of journal articles is to be expected. Fails WP:PROF. RJC Talk Contribs 19:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Please consider the publications about him listed under References. --Eastmain (talk) 19:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I see book reviews and UCLA publications (or UCLA alumni association publications). Neither speaks to his impact as a scholar (every book gets reviewed). The alumni association article might speak to non-academic notability, but I don't think that alumni being upset over radicalism counts as notable, let alone something that satisfies WP:ONEEVENT. RJC Talk Contribs 20:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I'm going to agree with RJC and stick by my nomination. Close call, but I don't think either WP:BIO or WP:PROF is quite met. — Satori Son 20:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I see book reviews and UCLA publications (or UCLA alumni association publications). Neither speaks to his impact as a scholar (every book gets reviewed). The alumni association article might speak to non-academic notability, but I don't think that alumni being upset over radicalism counts as notable, let alone something that satisfies WP:ONEEVENT. RJC Talk Contribs 20:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Please consider the publications about him listed under References. --Eastmain (talk) 19:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Just another prof. Madman (talk) 21:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- could you perhaps explain this cryptic remark? DGG (talk) 23:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep based on the references found by Eastmain. Edward321 (talk) 02:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The notability guideline is "more than the average college professor." An associate professor without significant press coverage, awards in his field, etc., doesn't qualify. RayAYang (talk) 21:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete One book, just published, and a few articles and some miscellaneous publication is not yet a notable academic record. DGG (talk) 02:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per RJC. --Crusio (talk) 08:38, 17 July 2008 (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.