Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Palmer (psychologist)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

John Palmer (psychologist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Exponent of Parapsychology (e.g. ESP). Sourced to CV on Parapsychology organization. Coverage in BEFORE not much more. Does not seem to meet WP:PROF, and is mostly published in the Journal of Parapsychology. Icewhiz (talk) 10:04, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 10:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 10:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:PROF and WP:FRINGE. Note to avoid confusion: there is a psychologist named John Palmer at the University of Washington who is a different person . XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:38, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The John Palmer at UW got his PhD at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; the John Palmer at Rhine got his from UT Austin. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete As I cannot tell if there is one or two Dr John PALMER's (at least) or just the one. So I am having real difficulty finding any notability |(or maybe finding a lot).Slatersteven (talk) 18:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete There are at least 3 John Palmers who are psychologists. Maybe more. John Palmer, psychologist who is co-author of a highly cited study with Elizabeth Loftus has scads more notability, as does John Palmer, psychologist who runs a religious group. Sorry, this particular John Palmer (para)psychologist does not pass WP:GNG. - LuckyLouie (talk) 00:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. A position in or award from a crackpot fringe body does not confer notability. The only publication I can trace to this person is this, cited 31 times, and that's not enough for WP:PROF. Apart from the other John Palmers mentioned above, there is also at least one notable John A. Palmer. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a classic example of why Wikipedia has guidelines for significant coverage of fringe figures. Palmer is fringe and clearly lacks significant coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:50, 18 January 2018 (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.