Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Dopatka


 * 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. Courcelles 11:34, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Frank Dopatka

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article appears to fail the WP:PROF criteria. The option of WP:AUTHOR was raised on the article talk page but the criteria there do not seem to be matched either when considering the results available in GScholar (very low numbers of citation matches for a computer science subject) and I find no matches in GNews. Fæ (talk) 13:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails both WP:ACADEMIC and WP:AUTH. His works are not widely cited. Appears to be an autobiographical page. Vanadus (talk | contribs) 16:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, very little of relevance in GScholar and GBooks, nothing else to indicate passing WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR. Nsk92 (talk) 22:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:Prof as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC).
 * Delete. The citations fall far short of WP:PROF. The books seem to be less academic studies and more technical guides to PHP and Acrobat, so WP:PROF isn't really the right criterion to use for them, but for WP:AUTHOR we'd need third-party reviews in the popular media (e.g. newspapers or trade magazines) and I didn't find any of that either. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete- Its a conflict of issues look at who crated this, its self promotion. DoDo Bird Brain (talk) 18:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * COI is rarely a reason to delete by itself --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  06:08, 30 August 2011 (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.