Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maurice Pedergnana


 * 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. Courcelles 00:15, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Maurice Pedergnana

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

when an article commences with "curriculum vitae" and looks blatantly like one it seems very WP:AUTOBIO. don't see how he meets WP:BIO nor WP:PROF. yes he has authored some stuff according to gscholar but nothing substantial. LibStar (talk) 00:44, 2 December 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:57, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Has published books, but their impact is not clear to me. Subject has almost nothing in the economics research literature though: WoS stats are 1 pub with h-index 1 and GS gives h-index 3. Website is unclear about his position. The article itself is a mess, mostly being a CV full of WP:OR. Also WP:SPA-created, so may be nothing more than a vanity page. Would help if persons knowledgeable in economics could weigh-in. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 16:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete Nothing particularly notable that might meet WP:PROF or WP:GNG, furthermore article is also a SPA/autobio/advert mess.Sailsbystars (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete for above reasons. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:11, 20 December 2010 (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.