Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Robinson (psychology)


 * 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. ✗ plicit  10:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Tim Robinson (psychology)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Appears to be non-notable with unverifiable claims - "leading researcher" and "wrote the definitive book". The references are a school blog and two Amazon pages. SL93 (talk) 04:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not seem to be up to the standards expected for WP:Prof, although quality of the writing of the BLP is poor. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:54, 22 September 2021 (UTC).
 * Keep. A noted retired/emeritus psychology Prof. The edited book Robinson, T.C.L. (Ed.), (1977) Proceedings of the XI (1975) Nobel Conference on the Future of Science, Gustavus Adolphus College, Wiley, (reviewed in Physics today) which in subsequent printings has the Nobel laureate Sir John Eccles added as the primary editor (Eccles, J. C., (1977). The Future of Science: 1975 Nobel Conference  and his role in running ( Directorship)  of the Nobel Conferences well as his papers on sleepy cats and opposums seems to me enough for academic notability.  Have toned it down a bit and added some stuff that might help. (Msrasnw (talk) 06:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC))
 * Delete. I'm not seeing anything suggesting he meets NPROF or GNG criteria. Being the director of a conference, particularly a non-notable one(?), isn't sufficient. JoelleJay (talk) 17:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. doesnt pass WP:NPROF, the impact on the field is not clear and his alone papers do not pass WP:NPROF#1. --hroest 21:37, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:NPROF.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:06, 28 September 2021 (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.