Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. T.R. Gopalakrishnan Nair

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. Definite consensus to delete. This bio as it stands definitely has no place in Wikipedia. The notability is also very much in doubt. Fences&Windows 20:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. T.R. Gopalakrishnan Nair

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

This is a long and rambling career résumé, and badly written at that. It's an essay, original research, an advert, and I'll welcome anyone who says it ought to be speedied. I just can't quite justify nominating it there. But it has so much that screams "speedy" to me and even looks like a copyvio, though I can't find the source! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:58, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It looks like it was speedy deleted before for being a copyvio of http://www.trgnair.org/ . The new one looks like very similar material with near gibberish (e.g. "An ambidextrous personality…") inserted to make it harder to identify as a copyvio. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 19:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable self-promotion. Angryapathy (talk) 22:21, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- -SpacemanSpiff 03:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: notability and copyvio issue. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 03:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non notability.--Sodabottle (talk) 07:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is badly written, but the subject meets WP:PROF. Cerebellum (talk) 16:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:25, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Substance is missing. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Could not find any entries in WoS using his last name plus the names of various co-authors listed in his CV. His publication venues are evidently not mainstream peer-reviewed journals, although he lists them as such, i.e. "International / National Journals". Impact likely nill and GS shows h-index of 0. Uncontroversial delete. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 16:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Delete - promotional; I don't there there is enough reliable, third-party information to merit inclusion. Cocytus [»talk«] 23:21, 9 December 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.