Redirect to:
This guideline reflects consensus about the notability of academics (people, not academic subjects) as measured by their academic achievements. An academic...
Click to read more »notability. Doesn't appear to meet WP:PROFTEST guidelines. Medtopic 04:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC) Delete per nom, WP:PROFTEST --Alphachimp talk 05:55, 23 June...
Click to read more »2006 (UTC) Delete non notable (WP:NN) prof and author. fails to meet WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO. Vanity article - notability for authorship also not established...
Click to read more »(View log) Not sure if this individual meets WP:BIO in terms of the WP:PROFTEST. A fair number of Google Scholar hits, but I lack the knowledge to determine...
Click to read more »notability and fails to meet WP:PROFTEST as well as WP:BIO. --Strothra 01:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Delete, fails WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO. --Coredesat talk 04:37...
Click to read more »(UTC) Strongest Keep are you kidding? What Proftest? He co-runs a super-popular blog! And he passes Proftest, anyway... - CrazyRussian talk/email 06:43...
Click to read more »June 2006 (UTC) No assertion of notability. Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:PROFTEST. Medtopic 06:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Delete. Author seems to be creating...
Click to read more »university professor probably passes WP:PROFTEST. up+l+and 18:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC) 'Weak Keep per WP:PROFTEST. I'd feel better if more verifiable sources...
Click to read more »but no particularly notable publications or ideas. He clearly fails WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO mgekelly 05:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC) Googling the name BTW will...
Click to read more »(UTC) Delete, fails WP:BIO and WP:PROFTEST. --Coredesat talk 04:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC) Delete for failing WP:PROFTEST Alphachimp talk 06:49, 28 June 2006...
Click to read more »putting article up for deletion as per request. Individual fails to meet WP:PROFTEST, article lacks verifable sources and needs citations. Article fails to...
Click to read more »Peyna 02:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC) Rename to Robin T. Cotton (he meets WP:PROFTEST) and clean-up the parts copied from his biography. (Anyone else tired of...
Click to read more »This notable award probably qualifies Jayme Tiomno for point 7 of the WP:PROFTEST. DarthVader 09:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC) Keep if N can be better established...
Click to read more »was delete. Mailer Diablo 02:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC) Delete. Fails WP:PROFTEST. Fails WP:GT: [1] -AED 06:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Delete No assertion of...
Click to read more »article in Sociology) in 1999. [4], which makes me think he meets the WP:PROFTEST, specifically, criterion 4. Mangojuice 20:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC) Weak...
Click to read more »debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 11:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC) Does not meet WP:PROFTEST guidelines. Medtopic 06:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Delete Unless external references...
Click to read more »was Delete. Deathphoenix ʕ 04:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC) Seems to fail WP:PROFTEST, NN. A google search of Professor "John W. Kercheval", III reveals 35 unique...
Click to read more »academic. Fails to meet WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO standards. --Strothra 13:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC) Just to point out: WP:PROFTEST is a set of guidelines about...
Click to read more »05:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC) No apparent notability to this academic (WP:PROFTEST). (User:Stefan.wolfrum understandably has used this to gauge Wikipedia's...
Click to read more »indication of notability whatsoever. No reason to think this meets WP:PROFTEST. Doczilla (talk) 09:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC) Speedy delete No assertion...
Click to read more »Mailer Diablo 14:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Delete. Does not seem to meet WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO. --EdGl 03:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC) Delete - per nom. --rehpotsirhc...
Click to read more »as it was apparently written by a student, but he fails WP:BIO and WP:PROFTEST if you choose to apply the latter. Not surprising being that he is a 1st...
Click to read more »is a vanity autobiography which makes no claim to notablity per the WP:PROFTEST. --Wine Guy Talk 21:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...
Click to read more »KEEP. -Splashtalk 22:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC) Not notable. Doesn't meet WP:PROFTEST guidelines. Possible vanity. Medtopic 06:49, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Delete nn--Jusjih...
Click to read more »article/redlink farm. Nomination Withdrawn per Sliggy and references to WP:PROFTEST. Bugwit grunt / scribbles 19:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC) Speedy Keep, vandalous/bad...
Click to read more »[1]; he only has 9 publications in 9 years. Probably isn't notable per WP:PROFTEST, unless his Polyhedral library can be called a significant contribution...
Click to read more »was Delete. Tawker 05:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC) Neither meets WP:BIO nor WP:PROFTEST. Not a "major local political figure who received significant press coverage"...
Click to read more »the debate was delete. No Guru 02:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC) Doesn't meet WP:PROFTEST. Medtopic 22:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC) Delete per nom. DarthVader 22:19, 24...
Click to read more »protect This article clearly violates WP:NOR, WP:VERIFY, WP:CITE, and WP:PROFTEST. Assertions of notability are made in the article but are not cited although...
Click to read more »to Me) 17:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC) Delete. Fails proposed policy WP:PROFTEST - no assertion of academic notability other than a list of published works...
Click to read more »15:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC) I see that several people here are citing WP:PROFTEST as the basis of their assertions to keep. My note to delete is based on...
Click to read more »Weregerbil 18:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC) delete I don't see how this meets WP:PROFTEST, which seems the appropriate test for notability of this NN bio topic....
Click to read more »-David Schaich Talk/Cont 02:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:PROFTEST. Nothing here makes him more notable than your average academic. Fan-1967...
Click to read more »15 January 2007 (UTC) keep this is a little different from the usual Proftest situation, because he does not yet have a high academic position, but he...
Click to read more »indicate on the talk page, the "number" of papers seems meaningless per WP:PROFTEST... as someone disciplined in science/medicine (i.e., thanks to my father)...
Click to read more »standards. Kr0nnik 20:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC) Delete per Lambiam. Fails WP:PROFTEST. -- ReyBrujo 03:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC) Delete since Vanguard University has...
Click to read more »Delete Pretty weak claim to fame. Certainly doesn't seem to put him over WP:PROFTEST. (Is an "Adjunct Assistant Professor" what I think it is, a non-tenure-track...
Click to read more »Sango123 03:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC) Delete No indication of meeting WP:PROFTEST. VfD from March 2005 was keep b/c some thought that his having been a convert...
Click to read more »educational Institutions. WJBA 04:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:PROFTEST. If kept, move to Daniel Akin, as we don't include titles like Dr in article...
Click to read more »protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) Fails WP:PROFTEST - NYC JD (interrogatories) 12:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC) Why? Please specify...
Click to read more »February 2007 (UTC) Delete, no evidence from WP:RS of meeting WP:BIO, WP:PROFTEST applies. --Kinu t/c 06:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC) The above discussion...
Click to read more »which I can't read, but looks impressive. She meets one or more of WP:PROFTEST criteria 3, "large quantity of academic work" (from the DE wikipedia article)...
Click to read more »protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) Delete. Fails WP:PROFTEST and just not notable. Eventhough there are a large number of publications...
Click to read more »thin) Alf photoman 00:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Delete. Fails provisional proftest. My fault; I should have checked history. Hornplease 07:52, 13 December...
Click to read more »(UTC) Delete. Article has POV issues and fails to meet standards set in WP:PROFTEST. It is pointless to use Google as a determining factor in AfD debate. If...
Click to read more »Article reads like a CV. Wikipedia is not an obscure faculty directory. WP:PROFTEST Irene Ringworm 04:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC) This AfD nomination was incomplete...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) Subject does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines PROFTEST and lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Steps...
Click to read more »urge the author to explain how Dominic Bocci meets WP:BIO, or even WP:PROFTEST. The awards must be notable awards and published works either need to be...
Click to read more »Delete as per nom. Would be an interesting person to meet, but fails WP:PROFTEST. I don't see the encyclopedic value of "youngest smallest" smokejumper...
Click to read more »musician, but does not generate anything of note. Does not pass (proposed) WP:PROFTEST; does not pass WP:BIO . Sliggy 19:46, 26 March 2006 (UTC) Delete per Sliggy...
Click to read more »shows the scientific community has recognized him as a standout, per WP:PROFTEST. But this isn't even an attempt to create a stub here. If there aren't...
Click to read more »watch | logs | views) – (View log) No proof of notability according to WP:PROFTEST. Created by the subjects family member WP:COI, as part of a vanity user...
Click to read more »Oskar 16:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Delete. Every professor publishes. WP:PROFTEST refers. She is no different than any other prof in any other college. -...
Click to read more »VodkaJazz/talk┐ 13:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC) Delete, obviously fails the proposed WP:PROFTEST. Sandstein 14:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC) Speedy Delete Non-notable teacher-cruft...
Click to read more »Assistant Professor? Fan1967 18:23, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Delete, fails WP:PROFTEST. --Coredesat 20:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Delete Asst Prof for ten years →...
Click to read more »indicate that when it comes to notability, this professor seems to pass WP:PROFTEST. Keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC) Keep, but expand should...
Click to read more »amateur groups. His publications don't qualify him for notability under WP:PROFTEST. Couldn't find out anything about the conducting competition via Google...
Click to read more »nn-bio for me Gu 09:31, 4 April 2006 (UTC) Delete, fails the proposed WP:PROFTEST. Sandstein 10:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:BIO.--Isotope23 14:42...
Click to read more »Eppstein (talk) 17:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Keep, appears to satisfy WP:PROFTEST. --Dhartung | Talk 19:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Keep Most cited paper...
Click to read more »photoman 17:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Keep as she passes the good old proftest. This is one of those rare occasions when my area of expertise overlaps...
Click to read more »June 2006 (UTC) Delete, vanity, no indication of meeting WP:BIO or WP:PROFTEST. Sandstein 21:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC) Delete, per nom. Also unsourced POV...
Click to read more »(edit conflict) You don't need to apologize, I agree. It seems to fail WP:PROFTEST. Alphachimp talk 01:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC) Delete as nn AdamBiswanger1...
Click to read more »deleting. --Crusio (talk) 20:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) Keep. Fully meets WP:PROFTEST, the article just needs work to bring it out. ==Paularblaster (talk) 21:06...
Click to read more »19 July 2007 (UTC) Delete due to lack of evidence that he satisfies WP:PROFTEST. The main problem, as I see it, is that the link to the subject's home...
Click to read more »June 2006 (UTC) No assertion of notability. Doesn't appear to meet WP:PROFTEST. Medtopic 05:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC) Delete She doesn't appear to be a prof...
Click to read more »links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) Subject fails WP:BIO and the WP:PROFTEST. Has an interesting job, but few attributions of notability found in reliable...
Click to read more »no context, nn.Bridesmill 22:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Delete fails WP:PROFTEST; possible attack page. Bucketsofg 23:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Keep and delete...
Click to read more »(UTC) Delete. Article is merely a copy of his CV posted here. Fails WP:PROFTEST. -AED 07:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC) This AfD is being relisted to generate...
Click to read more »(UTC) Comment, her notability hasn't been established correctly. Fails WP:PROFTEST: she isn't more noteworthy than the average school professor. -- ReyBrujo...
Click to read more »proceedings are much more acceptable than Jitse Niesen implies. See WP:PROFTEST for some guidelines in development. Note that this article has been around...
Click to read more »re-post (but similar), I meant to include not notable. Is WP:PROF or WP:PROFTEST a fair test as they aren't policy? Rex the first talk | contribs 10:56...
Click to read more »CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:PROFTEST. Not a speedy, as the guy claims to be "an esteemed researcher at the University...
Click to read more »was keep. Mailer Diablo 05:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Does not meet the WP:PROFTEST criteria. The author (Hjb) is clearly the subject himself. Is this a vanity...
Click to read more »{{db-repost}}, so tagged. On the merits, no indication of meeting WP:BIO or WP:PROFTEST, no sources, Google results are less than convincing. Sandstein 21:14,...
Click to read more »it's unlikely that he is more notable than the average professor. See WP:PROFTEST. --Metropolitan90 16:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC) Delete. Fails to meet WP:BIO...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) Subject does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines PROFTEST and lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Steps...
Click to read more »Delete, maybe speedy per CSD:A7. From what I see, fails WP:BIO and WP:PROFTEST. -- ReyBrujo 21:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC) Comment He wouldn't be a prof at McGill...
Click to read more »academic, nowhere near run-of-the-mill. He meets criteria 3 and 4 of WP:PROFTEST easily, and arguably criteria 2 and 8 as well. Mangojuice 19:31, 26 April...
Click to read more »to establish that he is more notable than the typical academic, i.e. WP:PROFTEST. Dragons flight (talk) 19:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC) Note: This debate...
Click to read more »article, a few published papers here and there, but nothing to meet WP:PROFTEST. Might well be a joke. --Kinu t/c 06:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Delete, No references...
Click to read more »only one has as many as a couple dozen citations. Doesn't seem to meet WP:PROFTEST. --Dhartung | Talk 00:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC) Keep Inadequate article...
Click to read more »Individual Differences 5:6 (1984), pp. 633-648, Times Cited: 266. Meets WP:PROFTEST --Paularblaster (talk) 08:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC) Keep as per above...
Click to read more »colleges in the United States Corpx 15:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC) Dhartung, WP:PROFTEST talks about academic works. It's possible that she would qualify by criteria...
Click to read more »things taken together would appear to not satisfy the requirements of WP:PROFTEST. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Naomi Scheman...
Click to read more »guidelines established by Wiki guidelines for academic notability. See WP:PROFTEST. No one has attempted to adhere to the guidelines after a request was made...
Click to read more »15:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC) nn biography, does not satisfy WP:BIO or WP:PROFTEST. Only 180 ghits for 'Mohamud Siad Togane'; less than a handful for the...
Click to read more »does not appear to be more notable than the average professor. See WP:PROFTEST. --Metropolitan90 07:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC) Delete per Metropolitan90....
Click to read more »WP:NFT: Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. WP:N: notability. WP:PROFTEST: the notability guideline for biographies of academics. Help:My article...
Click to read more »published author of title from Oxford University Press [1], so discussion of proftests isn't relevant. How about withdrawing it, mikka? Monicasdude 23:08, 26...
Click to read more »JeffBurdges that being a prof at Johns Hopkins makes one notable (see WP:PROFTEST for guidelines in progress), but in this case... the guy wasn't claiming...
Click to read more »merit an article to be kept. Either way, delete the article as it fails WP:PROFTEST and recieves only 95 unique Google results [1]. --TBC??? ??? ??? 04:59...
Click to read more »criterion relativce to this article in my opinion, unless you wish to apply WP:PROFTEST regarding Diana's work in the field of her Ph.D. BigNate37T·C 22:56, 30...
Click to read more »nominated for deletion 3 months ago. The subject seems notable to me via WP:PROFTEST; he's got a lot of publications, and he's at a reputable school and has...
Click to read more »20:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Keep, founder of a laboratory is not a WP:PROFTEST criterion but I wonder if it should be. Also winner of an NSF CAREER award...
Click to read more »don't think you should have brought that up. It is better to refer to WP:PROFTEST, which is a quite decent proposed guideline for the notability of academics...
Click to read more »you can see if you look 'em up on Amazon. Do his books help him meet WP:PROFTEST's test for "author"? Maybe. Is there a better standard to apply? Anyone...
Click to read more »MIT's very influential intro linear algebra course for decades, IIRC; Proftest doesnt take into account people who have influenced a vast number of undergraduates...
Click to read more »extent that I do not think Camara to be notable as an academic (per WP:PROFTEST), and to the extent that I am disinclined to think him notable in view...
Click to read more »2006 (UTC) Comment. I don't see how the subject of this article meets WP:PROFTEST. The criteria are that the person meets one of the following conditions:...
Click to read more »Even an impartial, well-written article (which this isn't) would fail WP:PROFTEST. -- Fan-1967 13:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Keep Her position of "Distinguished...
Click to read more »in blogland doesn't mean it's encyclopedic, and she clearly fails the Proftest (adjunct and all). Newsbank search yields some scraps. ~ trialsanderrors...
Click to read more »just isn't the way to go. But the lead scientist has a shot at passing WP:PROFTEST and that's all the notability you need, and that provides a more sure path...
Click to read more »2006 (UTC) Delete.This individual fails to meet the criteria listed in WP:PROFTEST. Please see the deletion discussion of the article for Shah Mahmoud Hanifi...
Click to read more »University of New Mexico but clearly fails to meet the standards set in WP:PROFTEST. Further, I doubt that all 28,500 of those hits refer to the same Mark...
Click to read more »referenced subject in fourteen more, as may perhaps be sufficient per WP:PROFTEST) that is, AFAICT, the subject of at least one independent, non-trivial...
Click to read more »11 September 2018 (UTC) Keep. Is more information needed? I satisfy WP:PROFTEST and notability. The book concerns the history of how I acquired the Hubble...
Click to read more »made by sources of dubious independence from him. As it is, borderline WP:PROFTEST and failing general notability. --Dhartung | Talk 21:21, 8 November 2007...
Click to read more »Alias Flood 17:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC) Delete. The real test here is WP:PROFTEST. And regardless of who did what when and why (below), I can't really verifiably...
Click to read more »believe makes the case for her being notable and she definitely passes WP:PROFTEST (which is a proposed policy). Of course, I think even danah would agree...
Click to read more »April 2006 (UTC) Delete. I don't see any assertion of notability here. The PROFTEST doesn't apply, because the article doesn't claim he's a professor. I don't...
Click to read more »(UTC) authors, who are known worldwide:in super-local authors:out See WP:PROFTEST instead. Future products: Out. E.g. PictoChat, "a chat client for the yet...
Click to read more »we did, I would have had a lot of fun writing some of them.) Fails WP:Proftest completely. Also, Prodigy-Schomidigy. However: the controversy was certainly...
Click to read more »delete article does not assert notability, and subject does not meet WP:PROFTEST. Pete.Hurd 02:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC) Keep. This article is fine as-is...
Click to read more »justification on the Greg Wain talk page. Please note what you're quoting, WP:PROFTEST is not a guideline, only a proposal. I don't see anything that asserts...
Click to read more »in his patent . 5) Contributing to a textbook doesn't satisfy #4 of WP:PROFTEST. -AED 05:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)edited 06:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC) Comment:...
Click to read more »protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) Fails WP:PROFTEST. Otherwise, WP:NOT a memorial, and 9/11 is my precedent. -- Y not? 22:13...
Click to read more »well as her having been published in journals several times) and per WP:PROFTEST we should look for something that makes her particularly notable. If an...
Click to read more »Article reads like a CV. Wikipedia is not an obscure faculty directory. WP:PROFTEST Irene Ringworm 04:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC) This AfD nomination was incomplete...
Click to read more »protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD) Fails WP:PROFTEST - NYC JD (interrogatories) 12:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC) Why? Please specify...
Click to read more »discussion at the talk page. --Kevin Murray 19:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC) WP:PROFTEST (Wikipedia:Notability (academics)) has been a proposed guideline used at...
Click to read more »article. He clearly does not satisfy WP:PROFTEST. --Bduke 07:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC) Delete. fails WP:PROFTEST further, article makes no claim of notability...
Click to read more »subject meets WP:PROFTEST some of the recent ADF noms in this category make me nervous, and so I will withhold my vote. The proftest is a very high bar...
Click to read more »19 July 2007 (UTC) Delete due to lack of evidence that he satisfies WP:PROFTEST. The main problem, as I see it, is that the link to the subject's home...
Click to read more »to Me) 17:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC) Delete. Fails proposed policy WP:PROFTEST - no assertion of academic notability other than a list of published works...
Click to read more »only one has as many as a couple dozen citations. Doesn't seem to meet WP:PROFTEST. --Dhartung | Talk 00:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC) Keep Inadequate article...
Click to read more »things taken together would appear to not satisfy the requirements of WP:PROFTEST. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Naomi Scheman...
Click to read more »watch | logs | views) – (View AfD) No proof of notability according to WP:PROFTEST. Created by the subjects family member WP:COI, as part of a vanity user...
Click to read more »colleges in the United States Corpx 15:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC) Dhartung, WP:PROFTEST talks about academic works. It's possible that she would qualify by criteria...
Click to read more »made by sources of dubious independence from him. As it is, borderline WP:PROFTEST and failing general notability. --Dhartung | Talk 21:21, 8 November 2007...
Click to read more »we did, I would have had a lot of fun writing some of them.) Fails WP:Proftest completely. Also, Prodigy-Schomidigy. However: the controversy was certainly...
Click to read more »Eppstein (talk) 17:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Keep, appears to satisfy WP:PROFTEST. --Dhartung | Talk 19:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Keep Most cited paper...
Click to read more »photoman 17:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Keep as she passes the good old proftest. This is one of those rare occasions when my area of expertise overlaps...
Click to read more »deleting. --Crusio (talk) 20:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) Keep. Fully meets WP:PROFTEST, the article just needs work to bring it out. ==Paularblaster (talk) 21:06...
Click to read more »indicate on the talk page, the "number" of papers seems meaningless per WP:PROFTEST... as someone disciplined in science/medicine (i.e., thanks to my father)...
Click to read more »just isn't the way to go. But the lead scientist has a shot at passing WP:PROFTEST and that's all the notability you need, and that provides a more sure path...
Click to read more »15 January 2007 (UTC) keep this is a little different from the usual Proftest situation, because he does not yet have a high academic position, but he...
Click to read more »20:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Keep, founder of a laboratory is not a WP:PROFTEST criterion but I wonder if it should be. Also winner of an NSF CAREER award...
Click to read more »February 2007 (UTC) Delete, no evidence from WP:RS of meeting WP:BIO, WP:PROFTEST applies. --Kinu t/c 06:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC) The above discussion...
Click to read more »protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD) Delete. Fails WP:PROFTEST and just not notable. Eventhough there are a large number of publications...
Click to read more »article, a few published papers here and there, but nothing to meet WP:PROFTEST. Might well be a joke. --Kinu t/c 06:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Delete, No references...
Click to read more »links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD) Subject fails WP:BIO and the WP:PROFTEST. Has an interesting job, but few attributions of notability found in reliable...
Click to read more »Oskar 16:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Delete. Every professor publishes. WP:PROFTEST refers. She is no different than any other prof in any other college. -...
Click to read more »indication of notability whatsoever. No reason to think this meets WP:PROFTEST. Doczilla (talk) 09:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC) Speedy delete No assertion...
Click to read more »protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD) Fails WP:PROFTEST. Otherwise, WP:NOT a memorial, and 9/11 is my precedent. -- Y not? 22:13...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) Subject does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines PROFTEST and lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Steps...
Click to read more »to establish that he is more notable than the typical academic, i.e. WP:PROFTEST. Dragons flight (talk) 19:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC) Note: This debate...
Click to read more »11 September 2018 (UTC) Keep. Is more information needed? I satisfy WP:PROFTEST and notability. The book concerns the history of how I acquired the Hubble...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) Subject does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines PROFTEST and lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Steps...
Click to read more »(UTC) Rename and cleanup, meets WP:PROFTEST. --Coredesat 07:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC) Keep, seems to pass the proftest. I moved the page to Robin T. Cotton...
Click to read more »merit an article to be kept. Either way, delete the article as it fails WP:PROFTEST and recieves only 95 unique Google results [11]. --TBC??? ??? ??? 04:59...
Click to read more »proftest and notability is subjective which this individual does not seem to meet. --Strothra 23:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC) even if she did fail proftest,...
Click to read more »but no particularly notable publications or ideas. He clearly fails WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO mgekelly 05:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC) Googling the name BTW will...
Click to read more »putting article up for deletion as per request. Individual fails to meet WP:PROFTEST, article lacks verifable sources and needs citations. Article fails to...
Click to read more »to the first criteria from WP:PROFTEST rather than the first caveat. Please check out the "Caveats" section on WP:PROFTEST to see what I am referring to...
Click to read more »notability and fails to meet WP:PROFTEST as well as WP:BIO. --Strothra 01:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Delete, fails WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO. --Coredesat talk 04:37...
Click to read more »debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 11:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC) Does not meet WP:PROFTEST guidelines. Medtopic 06:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Delete Unless external references...
Click to read more »was delete. Mailer Diablo 02:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC) Delete. Fails WP:PROFTEST. Fails WP:GT: [5] -AED 06:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Delete No assertion of...
Click to read more »(UTC) Delete, fails WP:BIO and WP:PROFTEST. --Coredesat talk 04:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC) Delete for failing WP:PROFTEST Alphachimp talk 06:49, 28 June 2006...
Click to read more »academic. Fails to meet WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO standards. --Strothra 13:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC) Just to point out: WP:PROFTEST is a set of guidelines about...
Click to read more »does not appear to be more notable than the average professor. See WP:PROFTEST. --Metropolitan90 07:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC) Delete per Metropolitan90....
Click to read more »-David Schaich Talk/Cont 02:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:PROFTEST. Nothing here makes him more notable than your average academic. Fan-1967...
Click to read more »nominated for deletion 3 months ago. The subject seems notable to me via WP:PROFTEST; he's got a lot of publications, and he's at a reputable school and has...
Click to read more »proceedings are much more acceptable than Jitse Niesen implies. See WP:PROFTEST for some guidelines in development. Note that this article has been around...
Click to read more »no context, nn.Bridesmill 22:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Delete fails WP:PROFTEST; possible attack page. Bucketsofg 23:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Keep and delete...
Click to read more »This notable award probably qualifies Jayme Tiomno for point 7 of the WP:PROFTEST. DarthVader 09:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC) Keep if N can be better established...
Click to read more »was Delete. Deathphoenix ʕ 04:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC) Seems to fail WP:PROFTEST, NN. A google search of Professor "John W. Kercheval", III reveals 35 unique...
Click to read more »don't think you should have brought that up. It is better to refer to WP:PROFTEST, which is a quite decent proposed guideline for the notability of academics...
Click to read more »Sango123 03:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC) Delete No indication of meeting WP:PROFTEST. VfD from March 2005 was keep b/c some thought that his having been a convert...
Click to read more »guidelines established by Wiki guidelines for academic notability. See WP:PROFTEST. No one has attempted to adhere to the guidelines after a request was made...
Click to read more »University of New Mexico but clearly fails to meet the standards set in WP:PROFTEST. Further, I doubt that all 28,500 of those hits refer to the same Mark...
Click to read more »Alias Flood 17:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC) Delete. The real test here is WP:PROFTEST. And regardless of who did what when and why (below), I can't really verifiably...
Click to read more »Assistant Professor? Fan1967 18:23, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Delete, fails WP:PROFTEST. --Coredesat 20:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Delete Asst Prof for ten years →...
Click to read more »Weregerbil 18:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC) delete I don't see how this meets WP:PROFTEST, which seems the appropriate test for notability of this NN bio topic....
Click to read more »urge the author to explain how Dominic Bocci meets WP:BIO, or even WP:PROFTEST. The awards must be notable awards and published works either need to be...
Click to read more »15:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC) nn biography, does not satisfy WP:BIO or WP:PROFTEST. Only 180 ghits for 'Mohamud Siad Togane'; less than a handful for the...
Click to read more »university professor probably passes WP:PROFTEST. up+l+and 18:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC) 'Weak Keep per WP:PROFTEST. I'd feel better if more verifiable sources...
Click to read more »Delete Pretty weak claim to fame. Certainly doesn't seem to put him over WP:PROFTEST. (Is an "Adjunct Assistant Professor" what I think it is, a non-tenure-track...
Click to read more »April 2006 (UTC) Delete. I don't see any assertion of notability here. The PROFTEST doesn't apply, because the article doesn't claim he's a professor. I don't...
Click to read more »Delete as per nom. Would be an interesting person to meet, but fails WP:PROFTEST. I don't see the encyclopedic value of "youngest smallest" smokejumper...
Click to read more »protect This article clearly violates WP:NOR, WP:VERIFY, WP:CITE, and WP:PROFTEST. Assertions of notability are made in the article but are not cited although...
Click to read more »re-post (but similar), I meant to include not notable. Is WP:PROF or WP:PROFTEST a fair test as they aren't policy? Rex the first talk | contribs 10:56...
Click to read more »which I can't read, but looks impressive. She meets one or more of WP:PROFTEST criteria 3, "large quantity of academic work" (from the DE wikipedia article)...
Click to read more »shows the scientific community has recognized him as a standout, per WP:PROFTEST. But this isn't even an attempt to create a stub here. If there aren't...
Click to read more »referenced subject in fourteen more, as may perhaps be sufficient per WP:PROFTEST) that is, AFAICT, the subject of at least one independent, non-trivial...
Click to read more »does not appear to be more notable than the average professor. See WP:PROFTEST. --Metropolitan90 07:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC) Delete per Metropolitan90....
Click to read more »believe makes the case for her being notable and she definitely passes WP:PROFTEST (which is a proposed policy). Of course, I think even danah would agree...
Click to read more »VodkaJazz/talk┐ 13:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC) Delete, obviously fails the proposed WP:PROFTEST. Sandstein 14:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC) Speedy Delete Non-notable teacher-cruft...
Click to read more »the debate was delete. No Guru 02:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC) Doesn't meet WP:PROFTEST. Medtopic 22:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC) Delete per nom. DarthVader 22:19, 24...
Click to read more »is a vanity autobiography which makes no claim to notablity per the WP:PROFTEST. --Wine Guy Talk 21:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...
Click to read more »in blogland doesn't mean it's encyclopedic, and she clearly fails the Proftest (adjunct and all). Newsbank search yields some scraps. ~ trialsanderrors...
Click to read more »as it was apparently written by a student, but he fails WP:BIO and WP:PROFTEST if you choose to apply the latter. Not surprising being that he is a 1st...
Click to read more »it's unlikely that he is more notable than the average professor. See WP:PROFTEST. --Metropolitan90 16:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC) Delete. Fails to meet WP:BIO...
Click to read more »(edit conflict) You don't need to apologize, I agree. It seems to fail WP:PROFTEST. Alphachimp talk 01:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC) Delete as nn AdamBiswanger1...
Click to read more »indicate that when it comes to notability, this professor seems to pass WP:PROFTEST. Keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC) Keep, but expand should...
Click to read more »extent that I do not think Camara to be notable as an academic (per WP:PROFTEST), and to the extent that I am disinclined to think him notable in view...
Click to read more »you can see if you look 'em up on Amazon. Do his books help him meet WP:PROFTEST's test for "author"? Maybe. Is there a better standard to apply? Anyone...
Click to read more »{{db-repost}}, so tagged. On the merits, no indication of meeting WP:BIO or WP:PROFTEST, no sources, Google results are less than convincing. Sandstein 21:14,...
Click to read more »CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:PROFTEST. Not a speedy, as the guy claims to be "an esteemed researcher at the University...
Click to read more »standards. Kr0nnik 20:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC) Delete per Lambiam. Fails WP:PROFTEST. -- ReyBrujo 03:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC) Delete since Vanguard University has...
Click to read more »in his patent . 5) Contributing to a textbook doesn't satisfy #4 of WP:PROFTEST. -AED 05:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)edited 06:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC) Comment:...
Click to read more »JeffBurdges that being a prof at Johns Hopkins makes one notable (see WP:PROFTEST for guidelines in progress), but in this case... the guy wasn't claiming...
Click to read more »thin) Alf photoman 00:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Delete. Fails provisional proftest. My fault; I should have checked history. Hornplease 07:52, 13 December...
Click to read more »nn-bio for me Gu 09:31, 4 April 2006 (UTC) Delete, fails the proposed WP:PROFTEST. Sandstein 10:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC) Delete per WP:BIO.--Isotope23 14:42...
Click to read more »Mailer Diablo 14:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Delete. Does not seem to meet WP:PROFTEST and WP:BIO. --EdGl 03:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC) Delete - per nom. --rehpotsirhc...
Click to read more »Even an impartial, well-written article (which this isn't) would fail WP:PROFTEST. -- Fan-1967 13:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Keep Her position of "Distinguished...
Click to read more »05:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC) No apparent notability to this academic (WP:PROFTEST). (User:Stefan.wolfrum understandably has used this to gauge Wikipedia's...
Click to read more »(UTC) Delete. Article is merely a copy of his CV posted here. Fails WP:PROFTEST. -AED 07:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC) This AfD is being relisted to generate...
Click to read more »Delete, maybe speedy per CSD:A7. From what I see, fails WP:BIO and WP:PROFTEST. -- ReyBrujo 21:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC) Comment He wouldn't be a prof at McGill...
Click to read more »MIT's very influential intro linear algebra course for decades, IIRC; Proftest doesnt take into account people who have influenced a vast number of undergraduates...
Click to read more »was keep. Mailer Diablo 05:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Does not meet the WP:PROFTEST criteria. The author (Hjb) is clearly the subject himself. Is this a vanity...
Click to read more »[14]; he only has 9 publications in 9 years. Probably isn't notable per WP:PROFTEST, unless his Polyhedral library can be called a significant contribution...
Click to read more »(UTC) Comment, her notability hasn't been established correctly. Fails WP:PROFTEST: she isn't more noteworthy than the average school professor. -- ReyBrujo...
Click to read more »criterion relativce to this article in my opinion, unless you wish to apply WP:PROFTEST regarding Diana's work in the field of her Ph.D. BigNate37T·C 22:56, 30...
Click to read more »