Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bülent Gökay
Stubbing a fairly long article and then stating "virtually no information" as the primary reason for deletion is probably not to be recommended as a course of action - although stubbing, in this case, was admittedly almost completely unavoidable as the original article was an unwikified resume probably copy and pasted (by someone with obvious COI) from somewhere else. As to the subject's notability - I'm completely undecided. A professor at a middle-ranking English university has a good, but far from certain, chance of meeting  on one or more criteria. Though, looking at the likely ones - British professorships are sufficiently less common than, for instance, American ones that the possibility of #5 should be considered, but they are sometimes awarded for administrative responsibilities one or two levels below what could justify #6, and this looks quite possible in this case. Otherwise, the subject has what looks like quite a long and respectable publication record, mostly in English but partly in Turkish, some of which looks probably well-cited considering his areas of research. The problem, made more difficult by the rather random order of the GScholar results, is judging whether he meets #1 - chances are, I think, that he doesn't quite, but I'm really not sure
— User:PWilkinson, 12:20, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:PROF (Wikipedia:Notability)