Deletion of Andrew Andersen

Comment: Despite the apparent sock party, we have no evidence that he passes . In particular Google scholar gives at best single-digit citation counts for any relevant publications by Andrew Andersen, nothing found by this Andreas Anderson (hard to tell because there are many pubs by other people with similar names but I looked through all the ones with nonzero citations without finding any), and single digits again for both А Андерсен and Э Андерсен, so he appears not to pass #C1
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF)

Comment: Does not meet cademic or .  Reliable sources refers to articles about the subject - a publication by the subject in a journal (not matter how notable that journal is) does not confer notability.  Claims of prejudice without any attempt to address the underlying notability issues does not impress
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A||WP:GNG)

Comment: There are a great deal of editors with few edits appearing here, all using "comment" with a question mark, and a few using similar language patterns. I would like to remind editors coming here that there are |notability requirements for Wikipedia and an article needs to conform to those. Please also see |arguments to avoid as there are some clear indicators that some editors are not familiar with this process. Also, please to not attack the nominator and please |assume good faith
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:AADD||WP:ASSUME)

Comment: Despite the raging and utterly unhelpful torrent of arguments in favor of keeping the article, he hasn't received sufficient |coverage in independent, reliable sources to pass our notability standards
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Another day, another canvassed AfD for an autobiography. Subject fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG)