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 14:58, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dmitry Karshtedt[edit]

Dmitry Karshtedt (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)

While certainly accomplished, simply does not meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:21, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:21, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Associate law professor isn't notable. The other accomplishments aren't notable. I can only find mentions of his passing in law blogs. Oaktree b (talk) 12:29, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This is a case where if the subject hadn't passed away early, they would likely have met WP:NPROF in 5 or 10 years. But alas, with low citation numbers and h-index, and no prominent position, he does not meet WP:NPROF. Curbon7 (talk) 03:19, 18 November 2022 (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.