Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Cummin

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 of the debate was DELETE. -Splash^talk 02:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jim Cummin

The material is of a reasonable quality, but I'm fairly sure that every last word of it is original research. At the very least, it's research presented in a completely inappropriate way. Perhaps this belongs in Wikibooks, but not here. Tom Lillis 05:07, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Not notable. It's not necessarily original research, as it just describes Cummin's published work (which is OR of course). But it doesn't Google well, I don't see Cummins or his work as notable enough. Herostratus 06:15, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. Wikibooks would not be an appropriate place for this. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 19:56, 1 December 2005 (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.