Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Rawlins - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

477:
You're right. I was just reading the search suggestion. I did some more digging and 'Rawlins JN' is Nick Rawlins. The problem is that there seem to be multiple people in Pubmed with the name 'Rawlins JN' so it's hard to dissect out this guys actual publications. However, he is a prof at Oxford.
147:
Please note that, on further investigation, I now believe this article should be kept. This person's publications appear under "Rawlins JN", and not "Rawlins N", as would be expected from his name, Nick Rawlins. The fact that I could not retrieve his list of publications using "Rawlins N" lead me
548:
Unfortunately not. If there had been no delete votes you could have done a speedy keep close because you withdraw the nomination. But because there have been a few delete votes you won't be able to close it yourself. I suggest putting your note right underneath your nomination. That way future
286: 66: 126: 504:
Ok we seem to have validated with primary sources only that the subject of this article is a Professor at Oxford, but in spite of all the keep votes no one has shown how he meets
148:
to nominate his page for deletion. However, he does have quite a few publications, as I subsequently found out, and they are fairly well cited, so his article should be kept.
393:
as it has no references. So we have an unverified article about someone claiming to be and oxford professor, the "external link" is not even to an Oxford page it is to
56:
sources to justify it's inclusion; a lot of his published work is available over Google Scholar search; and the article needs expansion and not deletion. There is a
61: 529:. Ok, I've changed my mind. This guy's article should be kept, but the article should include some of his publications and significant findings. 99: 94: 103: 17: 86: 60:
on the subject of academicians which sums up good reasons why academicians should be included as subjects in the encyclopedia. —
443: 315:- Oxford professor w/ at least 14 publications ... I think "keep and tag for expansion" would be reasonable solution. -- 327:. Professors at Oxford are indeed notable, because only a small proprtion of academics/College fellows are Professors. -- 270: 539:
I've added some publication info to his page. I started this deletion request. Is there a way for me to terminate it?
596: 479: 36: 549:
editors to this AfD will be aware of how you have changed your mind that you now believe this article should be kept.
577:. The person is notable as one of the very few professors at Oxford, as well as many well cited publications. 595:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
423: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
581: 569: 553: 543: 533: 518: 486: 472: 459: 450: 432: 405: 373: 343: 331: 319: 307: 295: 274: 247: 235: 223: 203: 185: 169: 152: 141: 68: 162: 513:
If an article topic has no reliable, third-party sources, Knowledge (XXG) should not have an article on it.
508:
being a professor is not a notability criteria any place that I can find any Knowledge (XXG) policy. Per
366: 218: 90: 566: 316: 133:
I pull up 7 hits when I Pubmed search this guy. Does not seem very notable and does not meet
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
57: 426: 357: 215: 82: 74: 394: 382: 353: 256: 134: 49: 420: 232: 578: 340: 292: 244: 509: 505: 390: 386: 540: 530: 483: 469: 456: 447: 429: 339:, Oxford professor? Of course he's notable. Could use a bit of expansion, though. 149: 138: 515: 402: 166: 120: 550: 304: 194:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
182: 328: 200: 398: 262: 589:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
385:
and could not find where it said being a "Oxford professor" met
468:
that, or are you just reading the automated search suggestion?
48:. This is a borderline case for notability when you refer to 303:, a professor at Oxford is not notable? Hmmm... I doubt it! 415:
OXION stands for Oxford Ion Channel Initiative. Rawlins
116: 112: 108: 199:
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks,
39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 287:list of Academics and educators-related deletions 599:). No further edits should be made to this page. 8: 214:Professors generally are notable, somewhat. 52:. The subject of the article might not have 352:Although this is a good article it fails 285:: This debate has been included in the 399:http://oxion.physiol.ox.ac.uk/oxion.php 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 419:(or was) a professor at Oxford: see 24: 233:Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 54:multiple, non-trivial independent 44:The result was The result was 1: 582:07:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC) 570:22:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC) 554:06:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 544:23:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 534:23:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 519:14:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 487:23:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 473:23:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 460:22:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 451:20:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 433:20:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 406:16:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 374:16:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 344:12:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 332:05:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 320:04:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 308:04:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 296:04:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 275:03:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 248:03:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 236:02:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 224:01:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 204:00:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 153:07:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 69:13:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC) 186:06:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC) 170:15:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC) 142:03:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC) 442:Is this the same person as 616: 389:, this article also fails 455:No, that's John Rawlins. 397:(<notice red link) at 592:Please do not modify it. 161:This AfD nomination was 32:Please do not modify it. 231:appears non-notable. 565:, non notable person 401:Delete the article. 165:. It is listed now. 63:Nearly Headless Nick 58:proposed guideline 290: 273: 206: 607: 594: 370: 363: 362: 281: 269: 265: 243:per nomination. 221: 198: 195: 124: 106: 83:Nicholas Rawlins 75:Nicholas Rawlins 64: 34: 615: 614: 610: 609: 608: 606: 605: 604: 603: 597:deletion review 590: 368: 360: 359: 263: 219: 193: 97: 81: 78: 62: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 613: 611: 602: 601: 585: 584: 572: 559: 558: 557: 556: 524: 523: 522: 521: 496: 495: 494: 493: 492: 491: 490: 489: 436: 435: 409: 408: 376: 347: 334: 322: 310: 298: 278: 277: 250: 238: 226: 208: 207: 197: 189: 188: 175: 174: 173: 172: 156: 155: 131: 130: 77: 72: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 612: 600: 598: 593: 587: 586: 583: 580: 576: 573: 571: 568: 564: 561: 560: 555: 552: 547: 546: 545: 542: 538: 537: 536: 535: 532: 528: 520: 517: 514: 511: 507: 503: 500: 499: 498: 497: 488: 485: 481: 476: 475: 474: 471: 467: 463: 462: 461: 458: 454: 453: 452: 449: 445: 441: 438: 437: 434: 431: 427: 424: 421: 418: 414: 411: 410: 407: 404: 400: 396: 392: 388: 384: 380: 377: 375: 372: 371: 365: 364: 355: 351: 348: 345: 342: 338: 335: 333: 330: 326: 323: 321: 318: 314: 311: 309: 306: 302: 299: 297: 294: 288: 284: 280: 279: 276: 272: 268: 267: 266: 258: 254: 251: 249: 246: 242: 239: 237: 234: 230: 227: 225: 222: 217: 213: 210: 209: 205: 202: 196: 191: 190: 187: 184: 180: 177: 176: 171: 168: 164: 160: 159: 158: 157: 154: 151: 146: 145: 144: 143: 140: 136: 128: 122: 118: 114: 110: 105: 101: 96: 92: 88: 84: 80: 79: 76: 73: 71: 70: 67: 65: 59: 55: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 591: 588: 574: 567:SlideAndSlip 562: 526: 525: 512: 501: 478:His page is 465: 439: 416: 412: 378: 367: 358: 349: 336: 324: 317:Black Falcon 312: 300: 282: 261: 260: 252: 240: 228: 211: 192: 178: 132: 53: 46:no consensus 45: 43: 31: 28: 216:mrholybrain 444:JN Rawlins 381:I checked 163:incomplete 579:RFerreira 341:Lankiveil 293:Pete.Hurd 245:Inkpaduta 541:Mnemopis 531:Mnemopis 484:Mnemopis 470:Zagalejo 457:Mnemopis 448:Zagalejo 440:Question 430:Zagalejo 271:Reviews? 255:- Fails 150:Mnemopis 139:Mnemopis 127:View log 516:Jeepday 502:Comment 464:Do you 413:Comment 403:Jeepday 220:'s talk 181:, nn. 167:DumbBOT 100:protect 95:history 563:Delete 551:Mathmo 383:WP:BIO 379:Delete 369:addict 354:WP:BIO 350:Delete 305:Mathmo 257:WP:BIO 253:Delete 241:Delete 229:delete 183:Edeans 179:Delete 135:WP:BIO 104:delete 50:WP:BIO 395:Oxion 361:Telly 329:Bduke 201:Quarl 121:views 113:watch 109:links 16:< 575:Keep 527:Keep 510:WP:V 506:WP:N 480:here 466:know 391:WP:V 387:WP:N 337:Keep 325:Keep 313:Keep 301:Keep 283:Note 212:Keep 117:logs 91:talk 87:edit 291:-- 289:. 259:.-- 125:– ( 482:. 446:? 428:. 425:, 422:, 417:is 264:Ed 137:. 119:| 115:| 111:| 107:| 102:| 98:| 93:| 89:| 356:. 346:. 129:) 123:) 85:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
WP:BIO
proposed guideline
Nearly Headless Nick

13:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Nicholas Rawlins
Nicholas Rawlins
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
WP:BIO
Mnemopis
03:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Mnemopis
07:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
incomplete
DumbBOT
15:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Edeans
06:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Quarl

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.