Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neil rankin

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. - Mailer Diablo 16:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neil rankin

Neil rankin (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A high school teacher, former college professor, and perhaps textbook editor. Unreferenced article with no signs of meeting WP:BIO, WP:PROF or any other notability criterion. Aagtbdfoua 03:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per my reasoning above. - Aagtbdfoua 03:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, suspect this may also be a case of WP:AUTO. Dppowell 03:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 03:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Unless someone can say how this person is notable. Acalamari 18:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, because article meets WP:BIO, WP:PROF, and notability. --24.154.173.243 22:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per nom. No assertion of notability. Should have been a CSD. StuffOfInterest 22:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete, for lack of WP:ATT and little hope of attaining it. For people who treat WP:N as policy: barely fails WP:PROF--he seems exactly an average professor, which is useful to remind ourselves when we try to decide what an above-average professor's biography would look like. (Note also, there is a Prof. Neil Rankin in Economics who is extemely notable, so if it an article on him is ever created, it should be kept) --Myke Cuthbert 22:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Judging from the photo, he didn't even write any textbooks, just edit them & not mentioned on the cover. First time I've seen a practical use for the photos of book covers. DGG 04:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per lack of references. Notability of academics is a debatable issue, but when an article has so few sources it doesn't provide much reason to keep it. EdJohnston 01:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete no assertion of notability. JuJube 06:20, 30 April 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.