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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:32, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Patricia Nichols[edit]

Patricia Nichols (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 appear to meet WP:NACADEMIC or WP:NBIO. Poorly sourced BLP, not finding significant coverage in additional sources that would ascertain notability, not sure if the listed publications satisfy the criteria stated at NACADEMIC. ^Complex/_Rational 16:32, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and South Carolina. ^Complex/_Rational 16:32, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I see no claim of notability here. Also a very poor article, mostly uncited, that looks like a CV and contains information I would not expect in a WP:BLP such as children's names. CT55555 (talk) 18:48, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @CT55555: I already did a copyvio check; nothing was flagged. ^Complex/_Rational 21:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I wasn't suggesting there was any copyright issues. CT55555 (talk) 21:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Apologies, I misinterpreted your comment; I assumed CV meant copyvio (since that's where WP:CV points). ^Complex/_Rational 21:56, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Ha ha. I wondered why you thought that. I had no idea. Sorry. The risks of using acronyms. I meant it looks like a Curriculum vitae. CT55555 (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The more appropriate WP:LINK in this case is WP:NOTCV. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The badly-sourced material can be trimmed but I don't see the citations needed for WP:PROF#C1, or any other form of notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete don't see how it meets WP:NPROF. I'd originally tagged this as like a resume back in April. -Kj cheetham (talk) 07:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, I looked at some old newspaper coverage for her and while I see some instances of her giving professional opinions or being quoted as saying something, I could not see any article or instance of WP:SIGCOV that would lead me to believe notability can be asserted. Also agree with above that the article state resembles a Curriculum vitae. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:23, 5 August 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.