Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dermot J. O'Reilly

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 18:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dermot J. O'Reilly

Dermot J. O'Reilly (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I see absolutely nothing confirming this man's notability. The only google hit is a marriage notice: [1] The Evil Spartan 16:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - Not yet notable. Tiptopper 16:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:BIO and WP:PROF. The most he's been cited by is 11.--Sethacus 16:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. And on top of everything, it appears to be an autobiography. GregorB 16:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —David Eppstein 20:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• delete fails WP:BIO and WP:PROF. Pete.Hurd 21:49, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I cannot find any significant papers. The Google Scholar refs [2] are to another Dermot O'Reilly, a demographer. Web of Science shows one paper only, Bellucci S, O'Reilly D, Nonminimal string corrections and supergravity PHYSICAL REVIEW D 73 (6): Art. No. 065009 MAR 2006 , cited zero times. arXiv has two additional unpublished papers. [3] and [4]. I know the word "vanity" is depreciated, but .... DGG (talk) 21:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. A physicist with a PhD in 2006 would need to have done something special to have yet attained WP:PROF standards, and there is no evidence that this is the case here. I've also failed to find any evidence that the book he edited (Accepting the Challenge: The Memoirs of Michael Flannery (2001)) is notable. Espresso Addict 21:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. A lot of largely-unsourced detail but nothing stands out as notable. —David Eppstein 22:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete vanity page. JJL 22:51, 30 September 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.