Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alison Mawhinney: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
DGG (talk | contribs)
Line 13: Line 13:
*'''Delete''' Fails [[WP:ACADEMIC]]. [[User:Masterpiece2000|<font color="green">Masterpiece2000</font>]] ([[User talk:Masterpiece2000|<font color="green">talk</font>]]) 02:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Fails [[WP:ACADEMIC]]. [[User:Masterpiece2000|<font color="green">Masterpiece2000</font>]] ([[User talk:Masterpiece2000|<font color="green">talk</font>]]) 02:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' fails [[WP:PROF]], with a little bit of a soapboxing problem as well due to the article mostly being a lengthy quote from an essay she wrote. [[User:Starblind|Andrew Lenahan]] - <b><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">St</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF5500">ar</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF8000">bli</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FFC000">nd</FONT></b> 14:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' fails [[WP:PROF]], with a little bit of a soapboxing problem as well due to the article mostly being a lengthy quote from an essay she wrote. [[User:Starblind|Andrew Lenahan]] - <b><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">St</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF5500">ar</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF8000">bli</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FFC000">nd</FONT></b> 14:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' I dont want to sound like a tenure committee reviewer and say "inadequate amount of publications" but that's the phrase that comes to mind here. '''[[User:DGG|DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG|talk]]) 03:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:07, 20 June 2008

Alison Mawhinney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable academic. No evidence is presented that this academic rises above others of her discipline or specialty. Article mentions that she has presented a paper at a symposium and published an article, but there's nothing inherently notable about either, no was any notable action taken as a result of either. This seems like a bit of a vanity article, though I'm far from certain that's the case. Relevant Google hits are few, and Google Scholar returns are also few and not particularly noteworthy. (Contested speedy and PROD.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 00:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]