Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. J.J. Robinson


 * 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 of the debate was delete. BD2412 T 16:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Dr. J.J. Robinson
probable hoax Tom Harrison Talk 00:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. &#126;MDD4696 01:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete only claim to notability is developing a theorum with no google hits. Ruby 01:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable. -- Nacon Kantari  e |t||c|m 03:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. -Rebelguys2 04:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Grandmasterka 05:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.Blnguyen 06:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  (aeropagitica)   07:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverifiable, possible hoax. &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-25 10:53Z 
 * Delete unverifiable.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]](talk) 13:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverifiable. &mdash;This user has left wikipedia  16:18 2006-01-25
 * Delete per my comments on the above "Two Kierkegaards Theorum." Comment - It seems rather inappropriate to utilize googling as a means for verifying the existence of a scholar. There are still a number of journals that will not come up in a google search--that's why the EBSCO and FirstSearch databases exist.--eleuthero 18:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Latinus 20:35, 25 January 2006 (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.