Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talia Bettcher

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. Sr 13 07:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talia Bettcher

This biography was written by the person's partner. It is, and reads like, a slightly altered copy of the person's CV. This philosopher may be notable enough to have a page - I don't know - but this is not the page. Anarchia 12:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —Espresso Addict 14:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There's so much irrelevant material in the article it's hard to navigate, but I don't believe Bettcher yet meets WP: PROF: only an associate professor, bare handful of peer-reviewed papers, books are both listed as 'forthcoming', no awards/honours. The fact that the page was written by the subject's partner doesn't help. Espresso Addict 14:30, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not seem to pass WP:PROF. Even if the article did pass, it would need drastic reduction — many sections e.g. teaching and service can just be deleted, and others are way too long and detailed. —David Eppstein 15:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' Looks like the person's resume is on the page - Delete per lack of notability Corpx 15:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom - also, WP:COI. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 15:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no obvious claim to academic notability. --Dhartung | Talk 17:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please see the talk page for User_talk:Susanforrest, as it appears she created the page in January and it was speedy deleted for a direct copyvio of a website, and it appears it looks like the exact same thing. --sumnjim ^{talk with me·changes} 17:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the reasons laid out by the first two voters. JamesAM 18:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now The 2 books are to be published by a publisher previously unknown to me, but apparently a recognized specialist publisher. But as neither have been published yet, there are no reviews. There's one article in a good journal, 5 book chapters, and the rest are merely symposium presentations. But there is a remarkable amount of other activity, and some recognition for it--I can't judge that part. DGG (talk) 23:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep as it asserts notability and notes she has gotten some awards, certainly more than this professor. But this Autohagiography-cum-C.V. needs so much revision it will be painful. Bearian 01:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination, this assistance professor does not look to meet WP:BIO and the article reads much like a resume. Yamaguchi先生 04:33, 23 July 2007 (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.