Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Beckley

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 no consensus. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:12, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Beckley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Problematic article resembling a resume. Dubious notability. The subject has written some books, has plenty of postnominals, but the article seems to lack serious citations to ascertain the subject's notability per WP:PROF.  Ohc ^¡digame! 07:41, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 13:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 13:17, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 13:17, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete. A lot of credentials, minor awards, and activity, but nothing that looks strong enough for WP:PROF to me. And the citation record isn't good enough for a pass that way, either. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep' His book Electrical steels for rotating machines published by IEE, is in 768 libraries a/c worldcat. That's enough to prove him an authority in his subject. DGG ( talk ) 00:27, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:52, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Article needs cleaning up, but DGG established notability WP:PROF. I am One of Many (talk) 00:49, 24 September 2014 (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.