Deletion of Ricardo Duchesne

Comment: Your comment fails to address any of the criteria in . Duchesne's most successful article to date has been cited by a mere 12 people. What is the evidence of his scholarly importance or significance?  — Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ACADEMIC)

Comment: GS cites are 12, 8, 4, 4, 3 to give an h index of 4. Totally inadequate for rof#C1. Is there anything else? Too early
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)

Comment: ignoring all the crap above, any normal evaluation of this person reasonably comes to the conclusion that he does not meet  or any other standard: no large number of citations, no significant awards or prestigious positions, no news coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Fails . Beyond that, fails : If a work receives wide coverage, then an article about the work might be notable, but being notable for a work is not enough for an independent article. There is not enough independent coverage in the RS for an article on the author, but there might be for the book. I think the keep !voters are missing this very important point. Furthermore, his book is not a peer-reviewed book, so citations in academia are irrelevant. A look at the citations shows he is not being cited as an authority, but mostly to question him: ''notoriety'' of a promoter of a  idea is not enough to establish ''notability''. Also resumecruft per COI
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG||WP:FRINGE)

Comment: basically per Roscelese. Citability in GScholar is extremely low, with h-index somewhere in low single digits. Having 35 separate citations total is far below of what we usually require for satisfying #C1 on citability  grounds. I am not seeing anything else in the record to hang one's hat on in terms of passing  - such as signifiant awards after grad school, journal editorships, prestigious lectures/lecture series given, extensive published of the subject's work or anything else indicating passing 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:PROF)

Comment: My brief research does not turn up sufficient ''secondary'' sources that are independent enough to meet notability, such as 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Academics write articles, |that's their job. If they have something to say that does not fit into 10 or 15 pages, they publish a book. I see nothing extraordinary yet to warrant inclusion into an encyclopedia. I do smell an attempt to boost book sales, as the article is not primarily about the author but about the book
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill (WP:MILL)

Comment: No evidence of passing any of the  criteria
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)