Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Smagorinsky


 * 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 the Keep votes have visibly shown this in fact satisfies the applied notability standards here, WP:PROF, and that's what it takes for acceptance; any concerns about primary sources is not applicable by WP:PROF nor relevant, and there is no current promotionalism nor have any evident signs been shown to support this (NAC). SwisterTwister  talk  05:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Peter Smagorinsky

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of this WP:BLP lacks WP:N. It's mostly developed by the subject or people related to him and doesn't meet WP:NPOV criteria. Distinguished professor is an internal recognition at The University of Georgia. Wikieditor1332 (talk) 20:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete This article has only WP:PRIMARY resources and it's likely that it's used for self promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.137.20.69 (talk) 20:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I see no evidence that this person holds a chair, has won notable awards, or has done research that is highly cited/respected in his field. Fails WP:PROF. Although he seems to be the subject of significant press in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, I don't see anything other than local coverage. This is an international encyclopedia and local press does not suffice for WP:GNG. Evidence of WP:N is insufficient.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:15, 11 April 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 April 10.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 20:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   23:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   23:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I did close this as "delete", but according to being an "internal recognition" does not exempt "distinguished professor" status from WP:NACADEMIC inclusion criteria. So, relist

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:21, 19 April 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. It appears the nominator and previous contributors have not done any homework. No evidence that he holds a chair? Easy enough to find. Distinguished professor merely internal? Of course. So are most chairs. But it undoubtedly passes WP:NACADEMIC #5. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:27, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * That link confirms he is a distinguished professor but does not confirm that he holds a chair. Are those the same thing?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:01, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep I see your point. Our criteria at WP:NACADEMIC is that "The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution". I thought he had to have a chair.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I wasn't able to find any secondary resource for most of this article content. Almost all is referred to the subject's personal webpage at The University of Georgia which doesn't meet the WP:PRIMARY criteria.
 * Keep as he meets the #5 condition for Academics as evidenced by Necrothesp. The lack of outside sourcing is slightly unsettling, but Find sources:HighBeam negates that for me. Burroughs&#39;10 (talk) 04:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 19:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with . It meets WP:NACADEMIC #5. --Rogerx2 (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. This article is informational but could be used for promotional purposes because it only details the subjects educational history. It does not appear that the subject has made many significant contributions to academia or if they have, it is missing from the article. Bmbaker88 (talk) 21:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with . It meets WP:NACADEMIC #5. The article can be edited accordingly. AfD is not cleanup. — usernamekiran (talk)  22:46, 29 April 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.