Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Choi (professor)

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. Killiondude (talk) 07:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David Choi (professor)

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

no evidence of meeting WP:PROF -- he's an entrepreneur, not an academic. Promotional for his non-notable activities in that sphere. References are press releases, self-serving interviews, and , mostly, notices. Written by now blocked undeclared paid editor.,tho they had not yet been detected when the article was written--and it's time we made the speedy criterion for that retroactive. DGG ( talk ) 06:24, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:34, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:34, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Billhpike (talk) 04:11, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a paper written as a fellow is not enough to show major impact to pass academic notability one, and nothing else even comes remotely close to showing notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:56, 15 January 2018 (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.