Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert W. Mickey

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 01:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert W. Mickey[edit]

Non-notable academic, deprodded. Abductive (talk) 03:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Abductive (talk) 03:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:Academic unless the book is more notable than I was able to quickly gleam from google. Shadowjams (talk) 03:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Simply working at a University doesn't make one notable.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 03:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Bye bye! Way too many academics slipping under the line these days. Hairhorn (talk) 11:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - minimal cites at GScholar and no reliable source coverage that I've seen. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:PROF. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Assistant professor whose book has not yet been published; no other evidence of passing WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete One book, not yet published even. NOT NOW, to borrow a phrase from WP:RFA DGG (talk) 01:03, 23 June 2009 (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.