Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard NeSmith

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. - Mailer Diablo 12:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Richard NeSmith

Richard NeSmith (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Notability not asserted or verified. His laundry list of Who's Who awards are all minor, as I have three of them and I am far from notable. I see nothing that passes the proposed Wikipedia:Notability (academics) guideline either. Royalbroil ^T : C 03:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete seems like a very common professor, non-notable. Wooyi 03:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 04:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• I can't even tell from the article where he is affiliated now or what his field of expertise is. Unless the article can be beefed up significantly so that it more closely resembles something that can pass WP:PROF, Delete. —David Eppstein 04:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

  Comment. I cleaned up the article so that it at least looks more biographical and so that WP:PROF looks applicable. I still don't see much special in his educational history or publications, but the Acting Deanship is at least something. —David Eppstein 23:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per David. Looks like a resume to me. Part Deux 05:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per all of above. And a badly written resume at that. Edeans 05:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete and mildly chuckle at the inclusion of "Who’s Who Among American High School Students" in the article. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 08:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand your chuckle. That's how I found out about this article. I was searching for the "National Dean's List" and he came up. I am "nominated" for the current book, and I was in it years ago before the internet was anything. Not this time. Royalbroil ^T : C 15:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per above. MER-C 11:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, is the Dean of Education. So it would seem he is more than just a "common professor". Must say, at first I was suspecting this was a hoax at first glance and had already written out my delete vote... but because he is the Dean (even if it is merely of a nothing at all school it seems, maybe...) I'm going to give him the chance of getting a proper article being written. But if that doesn't happen in a few months (or whatever) from now, then it should be deleted. I've made a start on it myself to help along future editors, by including three links. One of them the CV, in which it mentions publications etc.. Mathmo ^Talk 12:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unless properly sourced and referenced by end of this AfD Alf photoman 15:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• delete in this case I do not think notability could be demonstrated. He is associate professor at a small non-research college calling itself a university, and that is not usually notable. Deans are probably not intrinsically notable, except at a few universities. But in major universities they invariably come from among the more distinguished professors, so the situation rarely occurs. For notability as an academic administration of a small almost entirely undergraduate college, he'd need to be president. As a final touch, the article on the college here doesn't mention the school of education. DGG 06:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Does not appear to be notable, and I have concerns about the quality of the references. WMMartin 15:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - non-notable. Turgidson 06:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Google Scholar search returns one journal article for Teaching of Psychology and a few Educare News articles. He has a longer list of articles on his website. But, I dont see enough for notability. John Vandenberg 20:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. The original author of this man's article has contributed only to that page, nothing else. There is a possibility that this is a vanity article. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 05:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

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.