Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Dickson (engineer)

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) Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:49, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Dickson (engineer)[edit]

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

Simply not notable for an encyclopedia, cannot find many sources and just blatant promotion. Sheroddy (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 21:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 21:27, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Shoddy nomination, does not appear to have followed WP:BEFORE. Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering should be enough for notability by itself, as should the presidency of the Institution of Structural Engineers. CBE is also usually considered enough (although the two lower orders OBE and MBE are not). It's merely informational, not promotional, to list the significant awards and fellowships that the subject of an article has attained. And there's nontrivial coverage of him e.g. here and here. The article is badly sourced but that's a reason for cleanup, not deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:35, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Simply notable for an encyclopedia that aims to combine the functions of general and specialist works of reference (see WP:5). --Andreas Philopater (talk) 21:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and close WP:SNOW - per David Eppstein above. --Jersey92 (talk) 02:05, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nominator is new to Wikipedia (less than a month), and notes on User page that they practice "Extreme article deletion" --Jersey92 (talk) 02:08, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Indeed, the CBE has always been held to satisfy WP:ANYBIO #1. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 16 September 2015 (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.