Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Meyer Ph.D


 * 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. Mifter (talk) 03:32, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Pamela Meyer Ph.D

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Standard entrepreneurial CV, with standard promotional refs. Calton | Talk 23:19, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Promotional guff - I always take the inclusion of PR-speak in an article to be a sure indication that there's not going to be a lot of independent coverage for something - and a search I just carried out has confirmed that in this case. Exemplo347 (talk) 23:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Promotional, clearly. Coverage seems niche/PR-like. No Google Scholar profile, but her Playspace article from 2012 has 12 cites, which hardly qualifies for major impact, so no WP:PROF. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 23:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. as promotional, but there may be some notability here and an editor without coi might want to try to write an article. One of here books is indeed in 940 libraries, which usually does indicate notability as either AUTHOR or possibly PROF.  But NOT PROMOTION is an over-riding concern.  DGG ( talk ) 04:26, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Promotional. Vanamonde (talk) 09:42, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete CV spam. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. <b style="color:#CCCC00">Joseph</b><b style="color:#00FF00">2302</b> (talk) 17:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Aside from somehow getting a promotional profile of herself published in the Chicago Tribune, there is nothing here that demonstrates or suggests academic or general notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:44, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Obviously promotional page.Not found evidence. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   00:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lack of notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:58, 5 February 2017 (UTC).
 * Delete per WP:SNOW. This page is very poorly sourced, despite the wall of self-selected/produced cites. We are not a resume website. I'd be willing to let it slide, as I do sometimes, if there were any evidence of notability or serious publications. Bearian (talk) 14:34, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. Seems to be another example of people styled "PhD", "Dr", or "Professor" being so often deleted. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:06, 5 February 2017 (UTC).
 * And your point being...? --Calton | Talk 00:31, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hubris. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:58, 9 February 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.