Deletion of Steve Pettifer

Comment: he has a h-index of 21http://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=yUwh2bEAAAAJ&hl=en which seems quite high (not sure how it compares to others in his field). But he doesn't seem to quite meet other notability requirements although he has picked up some references in print and blogs. There's a lot of rather unattractive  going on in the article, and the article was evidently written by Duncan Hull, one of Pettifer's collaboratorshttp://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/h/Hull:Duncan.html (see ) - so it doesn't look too promising, but those are not in themselves grounds for deletion. I'll await more expert opinion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Citation overkill (WP:OVERCITE||WP:COI)

Comment: He's not even the director of the project that our article claims as his main claim to fame (that would be, instead, Terri Attwood, who I believe is sufficiently notable for an article). And that project, Utopia Documents, is itself of very marginal notability (our article on it appears to be entirely self-sourced). The Kwok piece is a reliable source of something (that a lot of people have read one of his papers, and that he used that information to bolster a promotion case) but it doesn't actually speak to the impact of his research (why were they all reading his paper?) and the rest of the article is entirely self-sourced. The http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=yUwh2bEAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao citation record is not bad, but it's a high-citation area, so I'm not sufficiently convinced that he passes #C1 nor any other criterion of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)