Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Virginia

Points of interest related to Virginia on Wikipedia: Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Virginia. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Virginia|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Virginia. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Virginia/archive

Robert Lufkin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Does not appear to meet NACADEMIC or NAUTHOR. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and United States of America. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:HEY the article just got accepted from afc a week and a half ago Scooby453w (talk) 00:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AFC is not a notability guarantee. It means the accepter thinks the article has a 50% chance. Also that isn't what WP:HEY is for. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Scooby453w, please explain how this would meet the Heyman Standard if there have not been any improvements to the article since it was nominated for deletion? Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 00:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep where was the WP:BEFORE ? he is a full prof at a R1 University, he has a substantial number of high impact publications with 100+ citations (I count 21) which is usually passing the bar for a research-only professor, even more so for a physician-scientist. On top he has invented a useful tool (the needle). --hroest 01:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  They're all multi-author publications, no? And WP:NACADEMIC says distinguished professor, not every professor. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  he passes WP:NPROF#1 without much question, most contemporary research is multi-author and this is not exception. A subject only has to pass one of the 8 criteria, not all of them (are you referring to NPROF#5 with your comment?). --hroest 03:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Criteria 1 saysAs demonstrated by independent reliable sources. Can you point to any? (and yes). PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:14, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @PARAKANYAA: I have no particular opinion on Lufkin, but in the case of academics, publications in peer-reviewed journals are in themselves regarded as independent reliable sources because the peer reviewers are independent of the author. The citation count is an indicator that the research has made significant impact. Almost all scientific papers are multi-author, and Lufkin's place as last author on some of these indicates that he was the senior academic running the project (except in those disciplines that use alphabetical order, first and last authors are the priority spots, corresponding to the one who did the work, and the one who conceived, planned and scientifically-directed the work). Elemimele (talk) 11:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning weak keep It does seem to be over the line of notability on the strength of his book e.g. [1], plus this [2], would seem to be >1 event, a pass on GNG even without considering in-depth the academic publications such as [3] and whether his standing is significant in his field. Assuming he is RB Lufkin, he has quite a lot of Google Scholar hits.Andre🚐 02:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think we can include the information in the second source because he is a BLP. The first one is an interview. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  He would be a PUBLICFIGURE on the basis of his notability if we are saying he is a notable public intellectual and for purposes of his career. I agree the first one is an interview slash promotion for his book, but it's good enough for me when taken as a whole with everything else. There is an essay WP:INTERVIEW and I agree this one is a little on the fluffy side, but he has a bestselling book. I also did find at least one mention of the "Lufkin needle" he is credited with inventing. [4] Andre🚐 03:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, California, Rhode Island, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Week keep : Some sources are reliable tho this article needs some clean up, improvement should be done Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 01:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noël St. John Harnden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Promotional in tone and a clear WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG fail in my opinion. Aspening (talk) 01:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Visual arts. Aspening (talk) 01:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Cyprus, England, New York, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Orphaned article with weak sources, from galleries, press release and only one news post. Subject of the article is not notable. Notability is not proved. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 01:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I'm not finding anything to substantiate the notability of this artist after BEFORE searching. The current citations do not establish notability with the exception of the review in the Jakarta Post, but that is not enough to meet WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST. There are no notable exhibitions or collections in notable museums or national galleries that could be found. Netherzone (talk) 16:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Jakarta Post source is the only decent one to establish notability. I couldn't find anything else during WP:BEFORE. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:21, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 16:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The 63 Crayons (via WP:PROD on 20 October 2024)