Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Sykes (engineer)

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 keep. Meets at least one explicit criterion of WP:PROF, as documented with a reliable source. RL0919 (talk) 03:13, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Sykes (engineer)

[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)

GNG fail ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:51, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:51, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha. I can't believe my eyes. A Fellow of an IEEE is being nominated for deletion? Seriously?--Biografer (talk) 00:54, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:39, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:39, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Fellow is the highest level of membership in the IEEE, and WP:NACADEMIC even uses it as an example of what can satisfy criterion #3. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:03, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are 5,586 fellows of the IEEE.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:50, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

and they all meet WP:NACADEMIC. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:06, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; mess up by the nominator. PROF does after all use it as an example of what meets #3. I do understand it though as it is very hard to keep track of all PROF criteria. Happy New Year! // J 947 ^{^{^(c)}} 22:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Happy New Year! // J 947 ^{^{^(c)}} 22:19, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clear pass of WP:Prof. Did the nominator do WP:Before? Xxanthippe (talk) 01:17, 1 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Speedy keep Quintessential pass of WP:PROF#C3. The GNG is irrelevant in this case. XOR'easter (talk) 22:13, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (may as well pile on:)), as an IEEE Fellow meets WP:NACADEMIC. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:57, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:SNOW and WP:OUTCOMES. Fellows of major professional organizations (doctors, physicists, engineers) have been kept. If this were a nurse or lawyer, it would be marginal, but this is fairly clear. Bearian (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is my cheap WP:PILEON !vote. passes WP:NACADEMIC Wm335td (talk) 19:37, 6 January 2020 (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.