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. Daniel (talk) 02:37, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rodney Scott (author)[edit]

Rodney Scott (author) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG, there doesn't appear to be any independent coverage of the subject. Without a named chair position or the equivalent, and a GScholar h-index under 20, I don't see a compelling case for WP:NACADEMIC. signed, Rosguill talk 02:57, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not notable as an NZ public servant, does not seem notable as an academic.--IdiotSavant (talk) 01:19, 21 December 2021 (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.