Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Gill (economist) (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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

David Gill (economist)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Previously nominated and kept as no consensus, this assistant professor has a single digit h-index, and has done nothing remarkable. The article says he has made a "significant contribution" to whatever, then links to his school's PR office. Abductive (reasoning) 02:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —  Jujutacular  T · C 04:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —  Jujutacular  T · C 04:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete -- only the THE article gives anything like extensive coverage, and since there is nothing else and citation figures are so low, he fails WP:PROF. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 05:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --  ISLANDERS  27  09:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fails WP:PROF Racepacket (talk) 14:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per Nomoskedasticity's arguments – the claims in the article over-reach. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 15:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete. Does not satisfy WP:PROF. His page at IDEAS contains only 4 peer-reviewed papers. CronopioFlotante (talk) 18:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:PROF is not met. Warrah (talk) 20:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nom and Nomoskedasticity. Could not find enough to establish notability under WP:PROF. Does not seem to pass WP:BIO either.--Eric Yurken (talk) 00:38, 31 October 2009 (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.