Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burton Speiser (2nd nomination)


 * 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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Burton Speiser
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a just a CV with no indication of third party coverage. Previous AfD was no consensus. Billhpike (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I've notified participants in the previous AfD. Billhpike (talk) 19:25, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. I checked and couldn't find independent sources that assert his notability. --regentspark (comment) 21:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 01:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 01:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 01:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 01:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 01:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete does not meet the notability guidelines for academics.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * delete WP:NOTMEMORIAL, fails WP:PROF. Jytdog (talk) 04:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as per my first nomination of this article at AfD, which turned into a classic example of why "no consensus" should not equate to "keep" in AfDs. WP:BURDEN should apply to notability, not merely verifiability. - Sitush (talk) 06:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I note that nobody above has commented on the subject's citation record with respect to WP:PROF. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:36, 29 December 2017 (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.