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. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 05:26, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Everett Berry[edit]

Everett Berry (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)

This individual fails every criteria of WP:PROF. No research of significant impact, no prestigious academic awards, not a "distinguished professor", no publications of note (only a Ph.D. thesis), and no independent sources. In short, not notable enough for Wikipedia. Ἀλήθεια 17:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I have since edited the article to show two publications, the first as noted above is his dissertation picked up by Westminster, and the second is an article picked up by CBMW. I have removed the claim of "a number of scholarly articles". Ἀλήθεια 18:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. StAnselm (talk) 20:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. StAnselm (talk) 20:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not seeing anything on Google Scholar or Books. No indication that he's originated widely-discussed ideas or written a widely-reviewed book; doesn't meet other criteria of WP:PROF (no evidence of major awards, prestigious positions held, etc), and not notable as an author. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- does not look like a significant academic yet, with just two academic articles to his name. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. His publication record is far too thin to pass WP:PROF#C1, not just on number of publications but more importantly on a lack of evidence that they've had a significant impact. And the other WP:PROF criteria seem unlikely as well; in particular, Dean of Students is not enough for #C6. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:13, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: non-notable. Doesn't meet WP:PROF, especially WP:PROF#C1. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 18:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Doesn't meet WP:PROF. — ΛΧΣ21™ 02:58, 11 October 2012 (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.