Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikulchev Evgeny


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:24, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Nikulchev Evgeny

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Claim of notability lacks independent sources. A stub without anything to substantiate WP:GNG. Guy (Help!) 21:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * As yet I have no opinion as to whether this should be kept or deleted, but I must point out that the subject is not the vice-rector, but one of six vice-rectors, and not the top one. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: The article title is backwards, which affects search results. His name is Evgeny Nikulchev:
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Joe Roe (talk) 23:23, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Joe Roe (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Joe Roe (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Joe Roe (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. No evidence of notability. I'm not sure there's even a claim of notability; as the IP above pointed out, pro/vice-rector isn't a very prestigious or highly-ranked position. He's an academic, so WP:PROF could apply, but he has only a string of poorly-cited papers, many in predatory vanity journals, and I couldn't find any indication that he meets any of the other criteria. Joe Roe (talk) 23:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Citation record too low for WP:PROF, administrative position too low (not head of whole institution) for #C6, and no other evidence of notability present. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:59, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per Eppstein. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2016 (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.