Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul R. Blakemore
The citation record is borderline — as Joe already said, a couple of well cited papers but not much below them. I would be more inclined to support notability on the basis of #C1 if there were something of interest to say about the subject. But as it is, we have no in-depth sources on Blakemore (published by his employer or anyone else, but reliable and not merely self-published) to use as the basis of an article. There's not much content in the article as it is now, but what's there is too badly sourced to keep. And with no sourceable content, there's no basis for keeping an article, even if he does barely pass #C1
— User:David, 07:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:PROF||WP:PROF (Wikipedia:Notability)