The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:57, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roy Levien (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:BIO and WP:RS and based on my assessment of the edit history appears to be created by an editor with WP:COI. It seems to me this article only exists to advertise the book written by the author, which happens to be the only relevent reference here - the website references as his biography doesn't have his name on it, and the prior two references are deadlinks. Kylemahar902 (talk) 18:56, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Technology, Computing, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: He's so notable with his numerous patents that literally not one piece of media covers him; I can't find any mentions of this individual. Article's been tagged for notability/other issues for a decade. Sourcing now is basically a directory lookup and other trivial items. Zero notability that I can see. Oaktree b (talk) 21:19, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP: GNG. His Google Scholar profile has a lot of citations, but upon further inspection these citations are other patents, some of which are self-references and others which don't even mention Levein. This looks more like an indexing issue with Google Scholar, rather than evidence of notable impact in academia. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:26, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Notability isn't measured by the quantity or number of poems, or parts, or texts, or patents, or anything else. It's quality of sources and recognition that matter. Bearian (talk) 02:14, 6 February 2025 (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.