Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Thomas Foggin III


 * 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. Flowerparty ☀ 00:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

George Thomas Foggin III

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable academic. Deprodded after 7.24 days by an IP. Abductive (talk) 16:37, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —Abductive (talk) 16:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * comment Is their any significant contributions hes made that could make him stand out in WP:academic? Hes written 3 books apprently but does he have a larger list?, maybe some awards with some refs? If not I dont see him meeting the criteria of wp academic Ottawa4ever (talk) 17:05, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Those aren't books. Abductive (talk) 17:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I Should refer to them as publications instead. Though if had he written books he would probably would more notable. Anysense Im not seeing any more notability than a standard academic(nothing makes him stand out no awards, significant publications (how are they significant for the ones listed?) etc. And those people arent given articles unless they meet WP:academic which he doesnt seem too. Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * My thinking exactly. Abductive (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - minimal cites at GScholar, which is usually the best way to decide if an academic is notable or not. No press coverage or forms of reliable source coverage that I've seen. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of meeting WP:ACADEMIC. Deprod was most likely invalid as the IP is undoubtedly the latest sock of banned serial deprodder User:Azviz. DreamGuy (talk) 14:36, 18 June 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.