Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John F. Ashton
The case for  is weak, as discussed above; the case for  is even weaker (very little about him to be found in Google news or Highbeam, and not nontrivial enough coverage to suffice). The philosophy section seems problematic in its convoluted reading of its sources, and in any case seems to be largely about the content of a book that Ashton merely edited. The strongest case I can see for him is as the author of the "chocolate a day" book — that, at least, has some hits (14 on google news, 17 in highbeam) and while these sources still don't give nontrivial coverage of Ashton himself, they at least cover one of his theories in a little depth. But I think it was too much a flash-in-the-pan and  thing to form the basis of an entire biography
— User:David, 06:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:PROF||WP:GNG||WP:BIO1E (Wikipedia:Notability)