Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daisy Lovelace

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Daisy Lovelace}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Daisy Lovelace}})

The article is essentially a typed-out CV for an instructor at LinkedIn Learning. Its sourcing is non-independent and contains a good deal from LinkedIn itself. Her academic career is not distinguished enough to meet any of the criteria at WP:NPROF. I have not found any substantial reliable coverage that would point towards her meeting WP:GNG. Modussiccandi (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. No pass of WP:Prof or WP:GNG. Just LinkedIn material. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC).
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• Uncertain, I cannot recall that we have ever dealt with someone doing this sort of work, but might possibly pass the WP:PROF criterion 4: The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions. which is intrpeted as (a) Criterion 4 may be satisfied, for example, if the person has authored several books that are widely used as textbooks (or as a basis for a course) at multiple institutions of higher education. DGG ( talk ) 02:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. undistinguished career (so far). The subject comes up blank in VIAF as well. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. No indication for passing either WP:NPROF or WP:GNG. --hroest 15:53, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
• Delete seems more like WP:PROMO than a pass of WP:NPROF. I can see DGGs point though, but might be a case of WP:TOOSOON and/or not meeting WP:GNG for that. -Kj cheetham (talk) 22:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.