Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oliver Curry


 * 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. This is a Secret account 02:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Oliver Curry

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:PROF with flying colours. A newly minted PhD, Curry has a handful of articles in fairly small journals to his name - that just doesn't cut it. His "claim to fame" as it were was an amount of media attention of a "think piece" done for what I believe was a men's magazine. Heavy editing by anon ips and SPAs make me a bit suspicious of possible COI or vanity. a Prod tag removed by anon ip so here we are. Bigdaddy1981 16:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Bigdaddy1981 23:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Weakest of all possible keeps This one seems to keep its head above water BARELY. However, I would not miss it terribly.  But there does seem to be some references... --Jayron32| talk | contribs  17:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * But on what grounds? Two years out of grad school and a handful of papers? Bigdaddy1981 19:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * So there's a flurry of media attention - half of it mocking him (see the two refs about 'bad science' in the article)is this enough to suggest that his "notability" is anything but shortlived silliness. I despair at wikipedia if this remains. Bigdaddy1981 19:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak keep not for the scientific work but the media attention to it. Bad science, or whatever you want to call it, is notable if RS in the general media think it is. DGG (talk) 04:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.   —David Eppstein 05:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Is this not, however, rather against the notability guideline that notability should not be temporary? Bigdaddy1981 06:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete simply not notable. Bobby1011 07:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. Jack1956 22:47, 7 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.