Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James M. McCanney


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 02:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

James M. McCanney

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Mathematician and physicist of unknown notability. A Google search for  suggests that his work is mostly discussed only in Internet forums and his own website. The only cited references are self-written articles and a biography from his own site. Thus fails WP:BIO due to lack of multiple independent sources that mention him in detail. Pegasus &laquo;C&brvbar;T&raquo; 07:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.   —David Eppstein (talk) 07:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:PROF. Probably fails WP:BIO. 'Probably' because evidence for widespread media coverage over time could be hidden among the 9200 Google hits for "James McCanney". Amazon offers two self-published books of his, one of them with a decent sales rank, but it appears that that's not enough. --Hans Adler (talk) 08:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The claims in the article as to notability are unverifiable and not backed up by any citations. Google scholar gives 0 hits on [dipole-red-shift mccanney]. There is no mathematical problem that is known as "the Prime Number Problem". The website devoted to this exudes whackiness (one of the great unsolved mysteries of modern man; The Ancient Greeks ... did not know where they came from; After many decades of research ... the mysteries of the prime numbers have finally been solved and are presented in the book with 3 hour lecture DVD; The implications of the solution method are far reaching, having applications in scientific fields as diverse as Quantum Mechanics and Genetics). --Lambiam 14:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Lambiam. --Crusio (talk) 14:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Lambiam. FWIW, ISI WoS lists 1 citation of his Astrophysics and Space Science article, and two for his The Moon and the Planets paper. He never passed WP:PROF in academia, and his more recent work fails WP:FRINGE. Pete.Hurd (talk) 16:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable, not backed up by citations in reliable sources. Also, what's the "Prime Number Problem"? Never heard of that, sounds like a hoax to me. Turgidson (talk) 00:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I spent some time reading in hopes of finding some claim as to what problem was solved, but only saw an ever-increasing crackpot index.  Charitably, this is original research unfit for Wikipedia; less charitably, it's a probably a scam.  It's just possible that his physics is good, but his math is worse than wrong: it's gibberish. CRGreathouse (t | c) 02:34, 30 November 2007 (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.