Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Ozanne

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. MBisanz ^talk 13:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Ozanne

Prodded (and seconded); then tagged for speedy deletion before being rejected. The initial prod cited WP:N (actually, falling short of WP:PROF); my seconding of the prod included: "There are literally millions of lecturers/faculty in the colleges and universities of the world. There is nothing here that sets him apart from the vast majority who would not even be considered for entry into Wikipedia." B.Wind (talk) 05:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: I originally prodded, but since someone has added a published book which seems to be a leading book in its field, so I think it just barely merits a keep. Harry the Dog WOOF 06:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uncertain His 10 papers in Scopus have citations of 22, 12, 3 (etc). His one book,by a specialized publisher in in 91 WorldCat libraries (this is probably for a specialized UK book a considerable underestimate of actual numbers). I don;t know the standards in the subject, but I have my doubts this is sufficient DGG (talk) 13:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Based on the research done by DGG. Pass neither WP:PROF nor WP:BIO.--Eric Yurken (talk) 15:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete DGG's data could go either way, so based on lack of full professor rank, I'm going to apply the rougher "not yet more notable than the average professor" test. Ray (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For someone who did his PhD 20 years ago, his scientific production and citation counts are very low. Does not meet WP:ACADEMIC. --Crusio (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.