Nick Clifford : The article is about a British professor of geography; no secondary sources.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 01:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and United Kingdom .  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 01:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment (no opinion yet).  This Nick Clifford appears to be Nicholas J. Clifford, author of research works involving river bed sediment.  He should not be confused with Nicholas R. Clifford, a sinologist who appears to be notable (William R. Kenan Professor at Middlebury College).  It doesn't help that I keep finding NRC's books listed as being by NJC.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 02:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete .  There is a weak case to be made for WP:PROF#C1 , with a few triple-digit citation counts in Google Scholar.  But I can't find any sources that verify even the basic times and dates of his employment, and without that it is difficult to write even an adequate stub that passes WP:V .  (To be clear: through affiliations listed on his publications one can place him in certain universities at certain dates, but nothing with a bigger picture of his career.) — David Eppstein ( talk ) 18:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This archive URL of his profile from Loughborough has Cliffords employment history: [15] - I've also updated the citation in the article to include the archive-url.  Furthermore I've identified and added two SCOPUS profiles including [16] .  Resonant Dis tor tion 21:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Noted academic....  Full Prof at KCL and Loughborough till retirement 2020.  Lots of cited works (including Key methods in geography Cited by 1500+) (Perhaps searching GS under NJ Clifford, Nicholas Clifford (and checking is the same Clifford)  adds up to substantial pubs...  Technical clear Pass of WP:prof (8) by virtue of being (formerly) the editor of Progress in Physical Geography .  Added refs, including editorials in the journal, substantiating this ( Msrasnw ( talk ) 10:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC) ) [ reply ] Is the River Science Wikidot source reliable?   I had assumed not, but on further review it does seem to be a closed-wiki with some editorial control.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 16:44, 9 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The author of the article is another UK academic in the same field .  BhamBoi ( talk ) 01:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Agreed with the ! vote by Msrasnw, in particular 4 figure citations.   Furthermore a quick google identified secondary book reviews [17] , and [18] .   Also the worldcat profile here shows his books are held by hundreds of libraries, which should count for something.  Resonant Dis tor tion 22:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Prof: was a full Professor at a major university, and has lots of citations.  Bearian ( talk ) 01:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  01:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : the subject of this article appears to meet the guidelines (WP:ACADEMIC).  He has a considerable publication record and his work, especially Key Methods in Geography , has been cited over 1,500 times.  His role as the editor of Progress in Physical Geography adds even more weight to his notability.  His teaching roles at King's College London and Loughborough University also prove that he is notable.  Other references and articles support the claims in the entry, further enhancing his standing. -- AstridMitch ( talk ) 01:51, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep can be considered notable according to WP:PROF#C5 (Readership at Nottingam) and WP:PROF#C4 (key methods in human geography by Clifford is an introductory level textbook used in British universities) Vorann Gencov ( talk ) 13:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep