Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neville Hunt

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 Speedy delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neville Hunt[edit]

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

No indications that this subject meets the criteria of WP:PROF or WP:BIO or WP:GNG. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:34, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Vanity article/resume. Not notable. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 14:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, non-notable. Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 17:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete just promotional resume. 5dsddddd (talk) 18:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Only a resume. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 22:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and the reasons stated above. --Slon02 (talk) 23:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Promotional needed complete rewrite to be acceptable. EEng (talk) 00:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Coupled with the fact that the article is WP:SPA-created, it seems fairly clearly a vanity page. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 06:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Delete No indication of notability. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 16:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looking like a snowball. A busy lad from the look of it, but not different from so many other busy lads and lasses at universities worldwide. Now if only he'd played professional football for a couple of games, his place would be assured (even if his team had lost both matches...). But that's my soapbox. Peridon (talk) 11:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A good number of publications, but that's not one of the WP:PROF criteria. What we need instead is evidence that his publications are making a big impact, and I don't see that. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:17, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-note - I deleted almost everything - it was just a cut any copy paste of a copyrighted web page. Off2riorob (talk) 01:16, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snow delete. Will someone please put this article and AfD out of its misery. A classic snow delete. It is just wasting time -- no need to waste four more days of peoples' time.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:10, 6 February 2011 (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.