Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald N. Wood

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:08, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Donald N. Wood[edit]

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

Unsourced for nearly 7 years. I could confirm that he has had a few books published but Google Scholar doesn't suggest he's widely cited. No coverage of him found at all. Michig (talk) 19:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I originally created this page at the request of a handful of Donald N. Wood's friends who were, shall we say, technology challenged (retirement+). The original effort was to get him in Wikipedia for a reference to other pages (e.g., Earlham College). Interestingly, just noted that someone edited off the alumni page for some reason. He recently moved to Davis California and is in the process of determining what his academic contributions to UC Davis will be (he was teaching at OLLI at Duke University prior to his move). If updating his page will keep it "alive," I will endeavor to do so. v908

Not really, unless you can demonstrate that he meets the guidance set out in Wikipedia:Notability and back it up with citations of reliable sources. --Michig (talk) 21:39, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Found a few things, such as winning the Marshall McLuhan Award for Outstanding Book in 2005[1], a couple old academic book reviews of indeterminate length: [2][3][4] Cite count is low for PROF. Maybe if we can find a bunch more book reviews it would pass on AUTHOR #3. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 01:30, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - wouldn't seem to pass either WP:GNG or WP:PROF and the good helping of WP:COI doesn't help either. Stalwart111 01:36, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I had a look at the links that Green Cardamom came up with. The last link actually permits to see the book review using the "preview" button (showing the first page of the article). It is only a very short paragraph and I don't attach much value to it. I can't see the other ones, but even if they are more substantial, that would not be much to base notability on. The award does not seem to be something major. --Randykitty (talk) 13:43, 21 November 2013 (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.