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.
Seems to be a vanity article produced by the subject. The sources may not support the statements being made, or fail to report on the subject with more than a passing mention. An IP claiming to be the subject (24.207.103.36) has asked that it be deleted. signed, Willondon (
talk)
21:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
EXCUSE ME? TWO FIRST CLASS DEGREES FROM LONDON AND IMPERIAL. A PHD FROM CAMBRIDGE AND AN ARCS……ONE OF THE FIRST PIONEERS IN LARGE-SCALE SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, BY REF. ONE OF THE PIONEERS IN GLOBAL INTELLIGENT RASTER-BASED COMPUTER GRAPHICS, BY REF. AND A PIONEER IN START-UP TECHNOLOGY FOR AN ECONOMIC AGENCY WITH A BUDGET OF $1bn+, Scottish Enterprise, BY REF.
NOW MR EPPSTEIN, WHAT MORE ACADEMIC AND GENERAL NOTABILITY WOULD YOU LIKE, BACKED UP BY 25 REFERENCES?
MR. EPPSTEIN, I AWAIT YOUR RESPONSE RE WHAT CONSTITUTES ACADEMIC NOTABILITY. SO THAT I CAN PUBLISH IT WIDELY WITH MY MORE NOTABLE “ACADEMIC NOTABILITY” FRIENDS. SHOULD GIVE THEM A LAUGH. COME ON, BE BOLD AND FOLLOW YOUR PREDJUDICES!
Poolroadrunner (
talk)
02:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. Reads as if written by an inept PR operative. Claims he has a first class degree for his PhD at Cambridge, but Cambridge does not grade PhDs (correct me if wrong). GS cites hard to identify as there are many with similar names.
Xxanthippe (
talk)
00:06, 15 March 2022 (UTC).reply
Delete per David Eppstein's reasoning. I'd say the only person undermining the integrity of Wikipedia is the editor trying to use it to promote himself and is willing to abuse multiple accounts to do so. Best,
GPL93 (
talk)
17:24, 16 March 2022 (UTC)reply
MR. GPL93, PLEASE SEE MY RESPONSES TO MR EPPSTEIN ABOVE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN YOUR UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT “ACADEMIC NOTABILITY”, SO I CAN SHARE WITH MY ACADEMIC NOTABLE FRIENDS, AND WE CAN ALL HAVE A GOOD LAUGH! I WILL PUBLISH YOUR CONSIDERED RESPONSE WIDELY TO THEM.
Personally, when I submitted my thesis, I thought it was good, though maybe a little weak in parts. But I didn't have any more time to spend buttressing, so before submitting, I converted it to all caps. You wouldn't believe the difference that made. signed, Willondon (
talk)
01:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Willondon The pro move is to actually write it out in crayon. Mine was only for an MA so the standards may differ but I've found that the more childish you appear, the better. Best,
GPL93 (
talk)
13:21, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per everyone else. When an article can only be defended in the terms seen here, you know it's about a non-notable subject and is of no value.
RobinCarmody (
talk)
00:21, 19 March 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.
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.
Seems to be a vanity article produced by the subject. The sources may not support the statements being made, or fail to report on the subject with more than a passing mention. An IP claiming to be the subject (24.207.103.36) has asked that it be deleted. signed, Willondon (
talk)
21:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
EXCUSE ME? TWO FIRST CLASS DEGREES FROM LONDON AND IMPERIAL. A PHD FROM CAMBRIDGE AND AN ARCS……ONE OF THE FIRST PIONEERS IN LARGE-SCALE SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, BY REF. ONE OF THE PIONEERS IN GLOBAL INTELLIGENT RASTER-BASED COMPUTER GRAPHICS, BY REF. AND A PIONEER IN START-UP TECHNOLOGY FOR AN ECONOMIC AGENCY WITH A BUDGET OF $1bn+, Scottish Enterprise, BY REF.
NOW MR EPPSTEIN, WHAT MORE ACADEMIC AND GENERAL NOTABILITY WOULD YOU LIKE, BACKED UP BY 25 REFERENCES?
MR. EPPSTEIN, I AWAIT YOUR RESPONSE RE WHAT CONSTITUTES ACADEMIC NOTABILITY. SO THAT I CAN PUBLISH IT WIDELY WITH MY MORE NOTABLE “ACADEMIC NOTABILITY” FRIENDS. SHOULD GIVE THEM A LAUGH. COME ON, BE BOLD AND FOLLOW YOUR PREDJUDICES!
Poolroadrunner (
talk)
02:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. Reads as if written by an inept PR operative. Claims he has a first class degree for his PhD at Cambridge, but Cambridge does not grade PhDs (correct me if wrong). GS cites hard to identify as there are many with similar names.
Xxanthippe (
talk)
00:06, 15 March 2022 (UTC).reply
Delete per David Eppstein's reasoning. I'd say the only person undermining the integrity of Wikipedia is the editor trying to use it to promote himself and is willing to abuse multiple accounts to do so. Best,
GPL93 (
talk)
17:24, 16 March 2022 (UTC)reply
MR. GPL93, PLEASE SEE MY RESPONSES TO MR EPPSTEIN ABOVE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN YOUR UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT “ACADEMIC NOTABILITY”, SO I CAN SHARE WITH MY ACADEMIC NOTABLE FRIENDS, AND WE CAN ALL HAVE A GOOD LAUGH! I WILL PUBLISH YOUR CONSIDERED RESPONSE WIDELY TO THEM.
Personally, when I submitted my thesis, I thought it was good, though maybe a little weak in parts. But I didn't have any more time to spend buttressing, so before submitting, I converted it to all caps. You wouldn't believe the difference that made. signed, Willondon (
talk)
01:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Willondon The pro move is to actually write it out in crayon. Mine was only for an MA so the standards may differ but I've found that the more childish you appear, the better. Best,
GPL93 (
talk)
13:21, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per everyone else. When an article can only be defended in the terms seen here, you know it's about a non-notable subject and is of no value.
RobinCarmody (
talk)
00:21, 19 March 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.