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. J04n(talk page) 13:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Richard H. Griffiths[edit]

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

Does not meet the standards at WP:GNG. Recent PROD was removed via IP edit, I do not point any fingers, but this article should be deleted as per policy. Elektricity (talk) 13:55, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:49, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:49, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agreed that article does not meet GNG policy. I can't see why his biography points to a notably article for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a repository of everyone's CV in the world. Seaweed (talk) 16:45, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. C.V. Notability not established with the refs given. Szzuk (talk) 18:12, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete being a "principal advisor" to notable people does not make one notable. What is needed is indepth 3rd-party secondary reliable source coverage, which is lacking here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:40, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All sources are non-independent (the Dentons profile), mention him only trivially (quoting him as a spokesman), or are deadlinks. No pass of WP:GNG, or any other notability criterion, is evident. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:29, 29 December 2017 (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.