Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhusana Premanode

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 via WP:BLPPROD by Rjd0060. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bhusana Premanode (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)

Fails WP:NACADEMICS. No indication that his research has "

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No depth of coverage in the listed sources. Passing mention isn't sufficient to establish notability. And obvious WP:AUTOBIO by the article creator. --Drm310 (talk) 21:25, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment -- Two PhDs is unusual. The normal course after a doctorate would be a post-doc fellowship, rather than a visiting professorship. Having one patent and writing a couple of theses is not enough for notability. However, the article also has a tag as an unsourced biography. My reaction is to let that process take its course. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:27, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No refs, no assertion of notability. I wrote/own 2 patents, so what. Szzuk (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete visiting professors are rarely notable as academics. It appears this article was prodded for deletion with the prod expired, so it probably can be safely deleted.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:23, 7 August 2015 (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.