- 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. ‑Scottywong| speak _ 20:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Memo Diriker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm not seeing much in the way of notability, either as an academic or university official (unless I missed the memo). Clarityfiend (talk) 03:05, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 January 2. Snotbot t • c » 06:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete A worldcat search shows no books at all, and Google Scholar shows no article with more than 7 citations DGG ( talk ) 19:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for lack of evidence of passing WP:PROF. The local awards listed don't rise to the level of criterion #2, and what else is there? —David Eppstein (talk) 06:30, 4 January 2013 (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.