Deletion of Nigel Knight

Comment: Tiny cites on GS. No hope of passing rof#1. What else is there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)

Comment: A click on the Scholar button will show the issue. His work is absolutely trivial in impact. His books have 4 and 2 citations respectively, essentially two trees that dropped in the forest while noone was around. Fails other  as well as general criteria too. Pared down to achievements, there is nothing noteworthy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ACADEMIC)

Comment: Needs a rewrite, but I found reviews of 2 of his books in scholarly journals (one by the very distinguished scholar Vernon Bogdanor) - I added a section to the article - and his critical book on Churchill attracted some media interest.  Meets 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WRITER)

Comment: per Colapeninsula and Mscurthbert; unambiguously meets  and  (4c). If it weren't for the above !vote I'd recommend speedy closure per point #1 of , since the nomination statement is not an argument for deletion. &ndash;&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:AUTHOR||WP:SK)

Comment: reviews of his books + position establish notability under  and probably  also. What Randykitty said holds
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:WRITER)