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. Sandstein 18:28, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Fundator[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NPROF. Also an editor of multiple predatory journals. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:31, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:32, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Insufficient evidence in current article to meet our notability guidelines. (Some evidence that was previously in the article - I removed it - was so vague and poorly sourced that it was misleading.) ElKevbo (talk) 15:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I had tagged this for notabiity when I was patrolling with the intention of sending to AfD it is was not resolved; there is no RS on this subject to meet GNG, outside of self-published blogs / strange award / cititations from predatory journals, there is nothing there. Britishfinance (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The claims of significance are not just inadequate; they border on the incoherent. XOR'easter (talk) 18:26, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Google Scholar shows only single-digit citations (totalled over all publications), far below WP:PROF#C1. No other evidence of notability is apparent. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (article author) it in draft until ready. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SalmaonMaaki (talk • contribs) 08:26, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The article author SalmaonMaaki has unhelpfully moved the AfD article to draftspace and deleted the tags (which I have restored). Britishfinance (talk) 09:42, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Moved the article back from Draft for the completion of this AfD. Note to SalmaonMaaki not to do this again until the AfD is finished. Thanks you. Britishfinance (talk) 14:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NPROF and WP:GNG. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Draftification doesn't make sense, as there appears to be no path to establishing notability (of which there is no evidence). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2020 (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.