 | This article was nominated for deletion on 9 November 2016. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
The reference to CIIS was not correct. Dr. Delorme is an associated professor not an "associate" professor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.62.96.163 (talk) 02:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
This page should be deleted. It's basically a heavily padded, self-serving resume of an adjunct professor (i.e. a lecturer, not a researcher), whose most notable contribution was co-authoring a paper with several pseudo-scientists who are known for promoting superstitions like parapsychology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.39.79.142 (talk) 15:55, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
I have added further references to awards. I have also moderated the text "the first article" to "one of the first article". Although I believe the previous statement was correct, the new statement is more conservative and less likely to be innacurate. Arnodelorme (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
I believe that the article is now neutral. If not, would you mind to indicate where it should be modified? 208.54.4.238 (talk) 13:54, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Conflict of interest
editThis article about a living person was clearly written by its subject, as is evident by reading the article and its history. In addition, it seems to be written in order to publicize and advertise its subject, instead of to educate and inform its readers. In fact it is laid out very much in the manner of a CV. Such self-promotion belongs on the subject's academic homepage, not Wikipedia. Not much of this article would be likely to remain if all the self-promotion were removed. If someone who is not this article’s subject does not correct these serious violations of COI policy (e.g., here), I will nominate this article for deletion very soon. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 04:55, 8 November 2016 (UTC)