Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clement Pryke


 * 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.

Clement Pryke
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) (closed by Dr.Pinsky Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC))


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The current sources are insufficiently reliable. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 09:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:50, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: A quick look at Google Scholar (and News (the space stuff not the tree-house) (New Scientist and NYT mentions)) seems to me to indicate sufficient notability according to WP:Prof. (Msrasnw (talk) 10:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC))
 * Speedy Keep: Pryke is notable, whether the sources are reliable or not. His 2016 election as a Fellow of theAmerican Physical Society is sufficient in and of itself. Hs academic record passes WP:NPROF 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:PROF (well cited pubs) and #C3 (Fellow APS). —David Eppstein (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, passes multiple NPROF criteria. JoelleJay (talk) 04:15, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:42, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep clearly meets WP:NPROF. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:33, 3 August 2022 (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.