Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E. Michael Jones
The article mentions a couple flash-in-the-pan incidents, the coverage of which is insufficient for the |GNG. I suspected that he might be notable per , but I can't really substantiate the claim that his "collective body of work" is seen as "significant or well-known" in serious circles. Going to JSTOR, we find only a few reviews, and they sound like https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/899038.pdf this
— NONE, NONE
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:AUTHOR (Wikipedia:Notability)