Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan A. Jones


 * 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 Keep as other no input given, nac,  SwisterTwister   talk  06:13, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Jonathan A. Jones

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is a probable WP:COISELF and lacks any significant contribution to be considered as notable. The primary source for Marlow awards doesn't say if it is the same person or for what it was specifically. Every postdocs would have a something specific to their fields, but a thesis alone wouldn't make a biography notable. The other one is some sort of challenge to some center to reveal their proprietary research data. Overall, this looks like a WP:NOTWEBHOST profile. 162.244.81.174 (talk) 15:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The Marlow Medal is an important medal of the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) and I think there is no doubt that he won it in 2000. Someone at Oxford would not get away with putting that on his CV if it was not correct and J A Jones is listed on the RSC web pages. Unfortunately there appears to be little information about the winners on the web before about 2010. It has nothing to do with postdocs. It is for physical chemists under the age of 35 and is considered one of the most important awards of the Physical Chemistry Division of the RSC, which was originally the Faraday Society. I am not making a judgement whether this article should be deleted; only that you have to have better arguments if you want it be deleted. Why not put it to AfD and try rather than discussing it here? -- Bduke   (Discussion)  21:27, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I see that you tried but messed it up. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  21:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I support the case for deletion of this article. It is vain and self-promoting. (213.205.198.243 (talk) 08:08, 20 July 2017 (UTC))
 * This person is a run-of-the-mill fixed-paradigm researcher like thousands of others and has done nothing notable. There is no demonstration of significant originality to merit an encyclopedia article about him. I agree with the last contributor that this is a vanity article. Delete. (Cumonaveago007 (talk) 08:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC))
 * Note: the nomination and comments from above were copied from Talk:Jonathan A. Jones by  –&#8239;Joe (talk) 23:45, 20 July 2017 (UTC)


 * This is not listed correctly. I have to go to work, but will look into it later. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  21:00, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2017 July 20.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 21:04, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:18, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:18, 20 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. 15 papers on GS with over 100 cites each gives a clear pass of WP:Prof (although the work is in a very highly cited field). Climate data incident adds to notability. 13 edit IP Nominator is reminded of WP:Before. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:31, 20 July 2017 (UTC).
 * See Sockpuppet investigations/Barryispuzzled. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 01:02, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:PROF as already noted by Xxanthippe above. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:36, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep for the reasons given above and my 2016 comments on the Marlow Medal. This nomination may well be in bad faith, but I think we should let it run it's course. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  09:45, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I have now been repeatedly contacted off-wiki by David Carrey of wikiofficer.com offering his dubious services in protecting my page, and in particular claiming that he can "talk to the mods, who are trying to put your page down". Is this sort of paid editing spam a common reponse to AFDs these days? Regards, Jonathan A Jones (talk) 16:13, 23 July 2017 (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.