Deletion of Thomas A. Marting

Comment: No pass of rof or even 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P||WP:GNG)

Comment: I concur with Epstein and Troutman. Subject fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO||WP:NPROF)

Comment: Delete''' 15 citations for an article that is 3 years old in an emerging field of study like Biomimicry represents a lot of influence, it is not “mere.”  If you search all papers published in the entire field of Biomimicry since 2016, only 6 other publications have more citations.  https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Biomimicry+&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C36&as_ylo=2016&as_yhi=2018  The work is influential across the US, being written about by Great Lakes Biomimicry in Cleveland, Ohio and the Biomimicry Institute bases in Missoula, Montana.  This meets the wp:NACADEMIC criteria “The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.”  The Maurice Holland Award is a well known national award going back 37 years, as is the environmental and energy leader 100, these are not minor local awards.   This meets the  criteria “The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times.”  The subject was also the topic of an academic case study published by Case Western Reserve University School of Business, which demonstrates notable “influential in the world of ideas
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: Subject fails , , etc. {{noping|Tmarting73}}, who created this autobiography, {{diff|Wikipedia:Notability (academics)|898574695|897016612|now insists an award he got makes him notable}}. Delete the article and block the editor for wasting our time perpetrating this sham
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NPROF)

Comment: A "best paper of the year" award from a journal isn't significant enough for #C2. 15 citations (by the permissive standards of Google Scholar, at that &mdash; Web of Science reports only 4) isn't "highly cited" by any stretch of the imagination
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: All we seem to have here are some minor local awards and one published academic paper with a mere 15 citations in Google Scholar from other publications. It's not enough for , , or any other form of notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG)