Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halley M. Pontes


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 13:58, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Halley M. Pontes

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

does not seem to meet WP:NACADEMICS - McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 03:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 04:53, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 04:53, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Per nom. No WP:RS. WoS shows a single, newly-published-but-never-cited paper. Uncontroversial delete of a newly-minted-not-yet-notable researcher. Agricola44 (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2014 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Article now has 5 inline citations and should be kept.--DThomsen8 (talk) 12:13, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * These are just abstracts of the few papers he's written. If you're trying to show notability per WP:GNG, you'll have to find sources that discuss him, not sources by him. I couldn't find any. Notability on WP:PROF is a dead end. He's an entry-level researcher who has not yet made any notable contributions. His ResearchGate page lists all of his work (including master's thesis, conference posters, etc), but also shows 0 cumulative citations (same a WoS). Agricola44 (talk) 16:16, 30 October 2014 (UTC).


 * Comment Please explain the tags for copyediting and NPOV for this article.--DThomsen8 (talk) 12:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unfortunately fails both WP:GNG and WP:SCHOLAR with just 6 citations on Google Scholar. --Sammy1339 (talk) 20:11, 2 November 2014 (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.