Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Dalrymple (computer scientist)

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. Geschichte (talk) 09:05, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David Dalrymple (computer scientist)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to meet any notability criteria. The research section doesn't mention anything that would meet WP:PROF; I can't find anything of which he's the first author. Also no evidence of meeting WP:ANYBIO or any other notability criteria. Article about a dude with a job. FalconK (talk) 08:02, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. FalconK (talk) 08:02, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Cite 2 is impossible to stand up - a link to a whole book. The IEEE article is a passing mention. In fact all the sources are trivial or do not otherwise carry weight. A YouTube of a presentation with 1,300 views. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet our inclusion criteria for academics.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:31, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 22:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Co-author of a decently-cited 18-author paper is not enough for WP:PROF#C1 and none of the other publications listed in his Google Scholar profile [1] come close to the required level of impact. The Nestle piece goes a little way towards WP:GNG notability, but it's the only one, and it's too full of vacuous fluff to be the basis for an article. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:Too soon. BLP shows signs of the ministrations of an unskilled reputation manager. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

There is another BLP by the same creator at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danielle Fong (2nd nomination). Xxanthippe (talk) 01:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Delete as WP:TOOSOON at best. -Kj cheetham (talk) 15:05, 22 December 2020 (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.