Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Cockfield


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 14:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Arthur Cockfield

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence that he meets WP:PROF. Unimpressive list of coauthored books, and the only reference in the article is to what appears to be a fly-by-night academic journal that he founded himself. Bueller 007 (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 15:50, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 15:50, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 15:50, 27 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nom's summary is accurate. Agricola44 (talk) 16:44, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete fails the notability guidelines for academics.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:20, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep holds prestigious faculty position at a major Uni. Cited and quoted often as an expert on tax laws. Theres2 also coverage of his role in government tax writing. And he writes on tax issues. Influential and significant figure. Notability established. Articles could be improved. FloridaArmy (talk) 08:43, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you elaborate on "prestigious faculty position"? This is one of the criteria in PROF, but I don't see that he holds a named chair, distinguished title, or other official designation that would qualify. Agricola44 (talk) 18:58, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * He's been a research chair, department fellow, and is a prof at a prestiguous Uni. Queen's University. His influential status and roles along with his work and substantial coverage establish his notability. FloridaArmy (talk) 19:21, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * "Fellow" is generally a junior title and "professor" is not notable per se. "Research chair" is not a standard title, unless you are perhaps referring to Canada Research Chair. Does he hold this designation? Agricola44 (talk) 21:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: It would be helpful if could share some of the citations of the subject as a tax law expert.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  A  Train talk 01:06, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. After some amount of checking, it has become clear that the subject is not a Canada Research Chair. Several institutional and personal webpages list a "Fulbright Visiting Chair", which is presumably what FloridaArmy has referred to as a "research chair". The Fulbright web page indicates it is an application-based program that facilitates 1-semester educational exchanges for Canadian scholars wishing to visit a US institution. As such, it is clearly not an award that satisfies PROF #2. Agricola44 (talk) 16:05, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Lot of references, quotes and reliance on his views as a tax expert and his writings and scholarship on tax havens and tax. here are some examples. His books on taxes seem to be used at unis which also adds to his notability. i believe a text used by colleges and unis is notable per Wikipedia criteria? FloridaArmy (talk) 23:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete- Fails WP:ACADEMIC as above, his position is not a notable one.--Rusf10 (talk) 04:58, 12 January 2018 (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.