Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Louton

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. Surprised to see so many editors weighing in on this particular AFD. Maybe it's a sign we'll soon have more editors thoughtfully participating in the hundreds of other open discussions which would be welcome! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Louton

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Likely doesn't pass WP:NPROF. None of the sources provided on the page are independent of the subject. Google Scholar indicates he's been cited 553 times since 1996 with one second-author paper cited 115 times. Otherwise, I've searched Google, NYT, AP, and the Wiki Library without anything finding notable. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Finance, and United States of America. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with nom. WP:Too soon in this highly cited field. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Comment to add that I have found one source on Newspapers.com (1), but I still don't think it helps establish notability. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:52, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment SPI launched for article creator. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pin134 RetroCosmos ^talk 03:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. "Too soon" is inaccurate for someone who has been a professor since 1991, but his citation record doesn't pass WP:PROF#C1 and the best paper awards aren't at the level needed for #C2. I don't see anything else that could lead to notability here. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:57, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with nom. WP:Too soon. Also failed Wikipedia:NPROF. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 07:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The reference for having achieved notability is from his employer, and his awards are several decades old best papers.EasyAsPai (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The citespam in the lead—which contains not a single source that demonstrates notability—is all the more reason to delete. RetroCosmos ^talk 12:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree. Wikipedia is not the place to put everyone’s finance professor or the children of every famous missionary. I see no reason that this article should be held on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerryman1 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, considering the WP:SPI, an array of WP:REFSPAM & non-WP:SIGCOV as well. TLA (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Rusty4321 ^{talk contribs} 16:18, 15 January 2024 (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.