Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emmanuel Finnih




 * 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. Opinions provided by inexperienced editors in the discussion are given little weight, as they are clearly unfamiliar with Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. BD2412 T 04:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Emmanuel Finnih

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

Reviewed through NPP. Non-notable academic, doesn't seem to satisfy any of WP:GNG, WP:NPROF or WP:NAUTHOR. Citations are negligible and I could not find any reviews of his books in reliable sources. Spicy (talk) 08:12, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Advertising,  and Texas. Spicy (talk) 08:12, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Little sign of WP:NPROF or GNG notability.  WP:NAUTHOR looks plausible, and I was expecting to find reviews of books, but I did not succeed in doing so. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This article looks plausible, and all references are legitimate. Books on Amazon has been published since 2017 and samples of the book relates to subject matter. Could use a little suggestion but article seems legit. Johnjacksonhtx (talk) 03:53, 25 September 2022 (UTC) — Johnjacksonhtx (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * The authors book is available for sale on Apple, Amazon and Goodreads and Amazon in particular has a few reviews and ratings. The authors course books have been published since 2017. Mleee7156 (talk) 17:54, 25 September 2022 (UTC) — Mleee7156 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * The subjects citation supports the content and the references seems to be from a reliable source. Amazon and Apple are also reliable sources notwithstanding a few user reviews and ratings. Perhaps, suggestion could be made on the article. Websamaria (talk) 16:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * — Websamaria (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete per nom. Lots of SPAs doing the rounds here. MT TrainTalk 17:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I've opened and SPI as well at Sockpuppet investigations/Johnjacksonhtx. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. His cv shows him as a brand-new PhD, far WP:TOOSOON to have the academic impact needed for WP:PROF, and that matches the Google Scholar results linked above. We also don't appear to have WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR notability. The likely promotional activities are relevant to his academic specialty, I suppose, but they don't help the case. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:15, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - no coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Simply publishing a few books is not sufficient to meet WP:NAUTHOR and no evidence of notability as an academic. -- Whpq (talk) 02:05, 30 September 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.