Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators

This listing is for biographical articles on academics. Please see WP:BIO for guidelines on the inclusion of biographical articles in general and WP:ACADEMIC for the widely-used notability standard for academics. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Education for a general list of deletion debates related to education, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Schools for deletion debates about educational institutions.

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Academics and educators. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Academics and educators|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Academics and educators. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Academics and educators

Goki Eda

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

Notability issue. Xegma(talk) 09:31, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, Japan, Singapore, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I am concerned that this editor (Bulklana is just copying and pasting uncritically from university websites, on this and other articles.) In this specific case, I don't believe the subject meets WP:NACADEMIC. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:46, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:PROF#C1 and heavily-cited research publications. This needs cleanup to remove or better source the promotional description of his research and make the rest look less like a resume, but WP:DINC. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:PROF. I know the article is not perfect, but I am sure it deserves to be on wikipedia Bulklana (talk) 19:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anjalika Wijesinghe

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO, requires significant coverage in multiple reliable independent secondary sources. Both cited sources are predominately based on primary sources, which lack any independent editorial oversight. Dan arndt (talk) 11:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sri Lanka. Dan arndt (talk) 11:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article is based on two sources: an article in a newspaper: Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka) and an article on a magazine called Lanka Woman, which is published by Wijeya Newspapers Ltd. No evidence has been produced for the claim that the newspaper and magazine "lack any independent editorial oversight". Presumably more sources could be found in native-language publications in Ceylon.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment the article in Lanka Woman, is entirely based on an interview with Wijesinghe (which is a primary source). There is no indication that the interviewer or the publisher has undertaken any fact checking to ascertain whether Wijesinghe's statements are correct. Dan arndt (talk) 12:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No pass of GNG. Sources are not adequate. BLP reads like LinkedIn blather ("force to be reckoned with"). Xxanthippe (talk) 22:40, 13 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Once the blather is removed, there's nothing left. Fails WP:GNG and is nowhere on the same planet as WP:NPROF. Qflib (talk) 02:31, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No claim of notability in the article. The two sources smell more like paid publicity / churnalism than reliable journalism. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:37, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christophe Chaptal de Chanteloup

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

LinkedIn-style resume of a successful career teacher and organisation leader but nothing here passes WP:NPROF or any other notability criteria. Apparently an autobiography. Mccapra (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and France. Mccapra (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability not found. Almost nobody has cited their publications. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. He appears to be a prolific author but I didn't find the book reviews that could help him pass WP:AUTHOR. No evidence of any WP:PROF notability criterion. And if there exist in-depth sources about him that might contribute to WP:GNG, they are obscured by the many sources in the article and elsewhere that are by him not about him. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bolaji Aluko

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

Not seeing any evidence this person passes WP:PROF Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:14, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Nigeria. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:14, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked. He seems to have been a professor of no special distinction or dishonor, and is now a Nigerian "technocrat" as he describes it in a YouTube video. Nicmart (talk) 17:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Deletion is not cleanup. This entity passes the notability criteria for academics#6 as the head of a Federal University and also the notability criteria for politicians for being the a state commissioner in Ekiti State. Best, Reading Beans 10:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say he is a head of the university? --50.46.167.81 (talk) 05:49, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

50.46.167.81: The vice-chancellor is the actual head of institutions in Nigeria and being a commissioner is also a state-wide office and are a member of the state cabinet. Like I said earlier, this person is notable per NPROF and NPOL. Best, Reading Beans 07:21, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or draftify: Of the 6 sources on the page right now, 2 are from LinkedIn and Facebook, one is a press release listing 9 vice-chancellor appointments (and the person is just one of them), one’s an interview, and another is a short article about him leaving his position in 2016. A few interesting facts:
His dissertation dates back to 1984 but that's all I found in the academic sources about his publications:

https://www.proquest.com/openview/a124e89dd02157547fa02f712770d8d4/1.pdf?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y#page=435

A definition of vice-chancellor in the United States: a vice chancellor (typically spelled without a hyphen) is an assistant to a chancellor, who is generally the (actual, not merely ceremonial) head of one campus of a large university which has several campuses. Does it make a person notable per se? I doubt it. Even assuming "vice-chancellor" in a Nigerian university means "vice of the university's head," it's still not enough.
Finally, the editor who created the page back in 2009 has the username "Alukome." This raises a bit of a COI concern since the first 5 letters of that 7-letter username match the name of the page's subject. Either it's a divine coincidence, or there's something more going on here. I calculated it for other editors to verify: The probability of each letter in "Aluko" appearing in "Alukome" by random chance is 1/26. Since there are 5 letters, and they must appear in the exact sequence, the probability for the whole sequence "Aluko" is: 1/26*1/26*1/26*1/26*1/26 = 11,881,376. I'd say, it is pretty fair to assume a divine coincidence here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bolaji_Aluko&action=history&dir=prev

curprev 02:29, 18 October 2009‎ Alukome talk contribs‎ 1,497 bytes +1,497‎ ←Created page with 'Dr. Mobolaji E. Aluko (b. 2nd April, 1955; in Lagos, Nigeria; home) is a professor of Chemical Engineering at Howard University, Washington, DC, and was Chair of i...' Tag: large unwikified new article

50.46.167.81 (talk) 05:49, 13 August 2024 (UTC) P.S. I updated my comment to suggest "merging" the page instead of deleting it, with the idea of incorporating it into the Federal University, Otuoke page. His role as vice-chancellor could be mentioned in the "Staff" section along with others who have held the position.50.46.167.81 (talk) 00:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

50.46.167.81: In UK-based academic systems, which Nigeria and many other Commonwealth nations follow, "vice chancellor" is the actual head of the university. "Chancellor" is a ceremonial role. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Eppstein, thank you for clarifying. Does becoming the actual head of a university anywhere automatically grant a person notability in an encyclopedia? -- 50.46.167.81 (talk) 19:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of a major university, yes. See WP:PROF#C6, already linked above by Reading Beans. I think a national university with 11k students is good enough to count for that. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if the number of students alone qualifies a university as "major." It might be better to first figure out which universities in Nigeria are actually considered major and what criteria—beyond student numbers—are used. Nigeria is a very populous country (over 230 million residents) with hundreds if not thousands of regional educational institutions. Can we call of them "major"? While it's clearer when it comes to separate Wikipedia pages for institutions, it's less obvious when it comes to the people running them. I think it's fair to be skeptical about labeling an institution as "major" unless there are some solid facts I might be missing. Either way, improving the sources would be a good move, since they're not exactly up to par with Wikipedia's guidelines right now. -- 50.46.167.81 (talk) 00:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:PROF#C6 -- highest (non-ceremonial) position at a significant institution of higher education. Full professor at Howard University as well is substantially above average professor test. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 23:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a hard time finding any citable publications by Aluke or even figuring out his h-index, which are usually good indicators of "academic notability." There are so many professors out there, and only a small fraction of them have a Wikipedia page. I just don’t see how "being a full time professor" alone should get someone their own page on Wikipedia. As for being the "vice chancellor of a major institution," I've already mentioned my doubts about that. I’ve shared all my concerns, and I don't really want to comment any further on this page and leave it to the other editors. -- 50.46.167.81 (talk) 00:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohan Singh Kothari

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

BLP of an engineer created by a likely meatpuppet. Contains swathes of unsourced claims and no clear claim of notability despite many expansive statements. Mccapra (talk) 22:40, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, Engineering, and Indiana. Mccapra (talk) 22:40, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no sign of notability. His LinkedIn says "refer wikipedia" for information so this is likely some attempt to promote. Surprised it survived this long. C F A 💬 22:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rajasthan, Louisiana, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think a distinguished undergraduate alumni award [1] is enough and that's all I can find of any note. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:46, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete -- within the huge amount of cruft there's the one distinguished alum award which counts towards notability; a second piece of evidence at that level would be enough to push me over the line to keep. If it does do that, I'll probably just burn the current prose and start again. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Danda Rawat

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

No indication that the subject meets the academic notability guideline, as they are an associate professor without a title that satisfies the criteria. I'm also not seeing evidence that their work is highly cited. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Engineering, Arizona, and Washington, D.C.. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak keep~~. On Rawat's Google Scholar profile [2] the first two items are co-edited volumes and the third is a survey paper. The actual research contributions start at the fourth item. But I think there are still enough well-cited research contributions (albeit in a high-citation field) to make a case for WP:PROF#C1. ACM Distinguished Speaker is not enough for #C3 but it is also suggestive. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated to neutral, leaning weak delete because the promotional history of editing is a significant problem and the weak evidence for notability listed in my comment above, while valid, does not outweigh that. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:06, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @David Eppstein Yeah you're right here but I also added his individual research contributions in an article. Besides, I got that what you want to describe, I will see what else could be added to make that more notable Shariq Khan 1 (talk) 19:22, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @TechnoSquirrel69 Thanks for reviewing this article. I understand what you mean by, I will try my best to make it notable by adding more sources and depth information about the subject Shariq Khan 1 (talk) 19:19, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, @TechnoSquirrel69 I want you to revert the tag for "Nominated for deletion". You could had add the other tags for the notability or you can use the tag for the lag of sources. It's just a humble request. Besides, I will make sure to follow all the guidelines accordingly. Shariq Khan 1 (talk) 19:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shariq Khan 1, I just want to note that the subject's notability is not within your control as an editor; their notability will remain the same regardless of the state of their article. The articles for deletion procedure requires that the deletion notice remain at the top of the article for the duration of the discussion, which will last at least a week. If the article is kept at the end of the discussion, the tag will be removed. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:43, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @TechnoSquirrel69 Yeah i can understand that but the subject has done a lot in his career and i think there shouldn't be any notable issue for publishing an article according to Wikipedia guidelines. It might take bit time to get well managed and notable. Thanks to you for guiding me in this particular area. Also it would be really great for me if you could help by guiding me what else should i add to make the subject notable, I am still in learning process and that's the reason i am trying to publish articles on some random notable subjects. Thank you! Shariq Khan 1 (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, adding material to the article will not make the subject notable. To become notable as an academic, the subject needs recognition by his peers: heavy citation to his publications, fellowship in major scholarly societies, named professorship or distinguished professor title, and the like. See WP:PROF. Nothing we do here on Wikipedia is likely to have much effect on any of that. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @David Eppstein yeah I know that and I am adding citations as well and I also added citations on the previous materials you can check that. Shariq Khan 1 (talk) 14:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The at-best marginal argument for passing WP:PROF#C1 is outweighed by the vanispamcruftisement. XOR'easter (talk) 20:50, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, @XOR'easter I am totally disagreed with that point Wikipedia:Vanispamcruftisement because there is nothing in the article which triggers anything for an advertisement, spam or something. Besides, the argument for passing WP:PROF#C1 the article meets most of the notability guidelines for academics which can be quite enough for the subject's notability. Shariq Khan 1 (talk) 21:11, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. A classic example of a marginal publication record that is borderline for WP:PROF#C1, and nothing else to demonstrate notability. When a BLP is borderline I look to see if there are significant peer awards or other recognition. I see nothing that is convincing. For Shariq Khan 1, arguing here does nothing, you need to improve the article to demonstrate notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldm1954 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or maybe, get the subject to up their game. Easier said than done, I know. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:08, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Ldm1954 Okay I understand i will try to manage that according to the notability guidelines Shariq Khan 1 (talk) 11:08, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak keep The citation record for WP:PROF#C1 is indeed borderline, but I tend to favor keeping a borderline case because it seems possible that things will become more definitive before too much longer. But it's absolutely true that none of the other criteria are met. For example, none of the awards listed on the page support notability - they are all either internal awards, minor awards, or grant awards (something professors earn for doing what professors do). The page is also in need of a serious overhaul, not only to remove the tripe but also to make the rest of it form a coherent biographical narrative and provides a clear explanation of the subject's achievements. Qflib (talk) 02:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ali-Nakyea Abdallah

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

Fail WP: Academics Ibjaja055 (talk) 12:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Law, and Ghana. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Therese Moodie-Bloom

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG, WP:NBIO or WP:NACADEMIC. Can't find any secondary SIGCOV. AlexandraAVX (talk) 10:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, Women, and Australia. AlexandraAVX (talk) 10:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete? Can't see any notability yet. Xxanthippe (talk) 11:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Nothing in the article rises to the level of notability. Although we can have articles on people with significant media coverage despite no significant accomplishments, that requires depth of coverage in independent reliable sourcing that we also don't have. Searches didn't find anything better outside the article. Not quite an A7 speedy, but close. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: absolutely zero significant coverage. C F A 💬 22:52, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete. I wrote the article because my view is that she is notable, in the sense of "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor..." (Wikipedia:Notability_(people)), because she is the international head of Mensa, which is itself a notable organisation. For the record, I am in the process of gathering other references and citations (my plan is to talk with her later this week). If it turns out that the consensus here is that the article should be deleted, I will continue to improve my local copy of the article (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ben_morphett/Therese_Moodie_Bloom) until it is in a form that is acceptable to the broader Wikipedia community. Ben morphett (talk) 05:28, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Head of Mensa is an administrative position, not an award. WP:NCORP might be more relevant. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah, that's not an award. She has to meet WP:BASIC like any other president/CEO etc. Notability is not inherited. C F A 💬 14:19, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing here to indicate notability per either WP:BIO or WP:PROF. Nsk92 (talk) 13:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I did some digging and didn’t find anything particularly notable about this person. She’s mentioned as a regional official of MENSA, but that’s about it—no major media coverage or awards. Being a member of MENSA doesn’t automatically make someone notable according to Wikipedia's guidelines, and since MENSA is just an organization, not an award, I suggest moving this page out of the mainspace. If the creator thinks there might be some good sources out there, they can work on the draft in their sandbox and submit the improved draft for review later.50.46.167.81 (talk) 05:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- though I disagree with 50.46.167.81 that her notability claim is significantly stronger than just being a member of Mensa, there is not enough evidence that anyone outside of Mensa cares about who their current president is. Not inherited as CFA said, and not satistfying WP:NCORP -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 00:06, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:NOTRESUME. I was once a member of Mensa and that didn't get me a Wikipedia article. Her position with them is not a notable award and she is only visible in various directories. Her side gig as a puzzle creator has received no reliable coverage. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Goh

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:BIO, WP:NAUTHOR, WP:NPROF and WP:GNG. I can't find a single reliable secondary source on him, and this version of the article (recreated in May 2024) is sourced only by press releases and the author's own works. I could find no independent reviews of any of his books in a WP:BEFORE search, and nothing remarkable about his academic career. His press releases say he was a visiting/emeritus professor at the now-defunct California International Business University in the US (which appears to have a been a visa mill), South-West State University in Russia, and an online outfit called "SABI University" in France which appears to be a degree mill.

Outcome of the last AFD was to draftify per creator's request in April 2019. The draft was abandoned, and deleted in March 2021. Editors searching for significant coverage, please note that there is an unrelated Singaporean film producer with this name, and an unrelated Malaysian athlete. Wikishovel (talk) 16:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Business, and Australia. Wikishovel (talk) 16:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Can't find significant secondary coverage, all of the sources are either written by the subject or press releases. hinnk (talk) 03:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He seems to be a prolific writer of self-published books, which could be a claim to notability if we could find enough reliably-published reviews of them. But I didn't find any. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All books are self-published using Dorrance or Amazon. The articles in The Educator are not enough for author notability. I couldn't find any evidence of his books in library collections. Lamona (talk) 02:27, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nandini Balial

AfDs for this article:

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

Complete lack of notability slygent (talk) 04:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (talk) 05:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Delhi, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There still does not seem to be any notabilty. Odd closure of the first AfD. Xxanthippe (talk) 07:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC),[reply]
Delete - so some published articles in notable publications, but no sources talking about her as a subject. There is one brief mention of one of her articles in one book. I don't see how the threshold for WP:GNG would be passed here. --Soman (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We have the usual problem with articles about journalists, that it is difficult to find sources about her because they are masked by so many other articles that are by her rather than about her. But it is the sources about her that we need to have an article here, our current article doesn't supply any, and I didn't find any. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:41, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sophia Moestrup

AfDs for this article:

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

Last AfD almost 7 years ago was no consensus. I don't think she meets WP:BIO or WP:PROF. LibStar (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Politics, and Denmark. LibStar (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 05:17, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Catfurball (talk) 17:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'll make some edits, and you'll see if it still should be deleted. Sophia 71.191.12.87 (talk) 15:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. My opinion from 7 years ago remains valid today: for someone whose most prominent activity is book editing, we'd need a lot more evidence for notability as a book editor such as heavily reviewed books with reviews discussing her role as editor rather than the scattering of reviews of co-edited volumes that I found ([3] [4] [5]). Nothing else stands out as likely to provide notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This person doesn't meet WP:NPROF and I agree with David Eppstein that there's not enough to substantiate notability as an editor. Qflib (talk) 22:00, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Huffaker

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

Per article, Director of UX Research for Google, but no further claims of notability. Two sources are linked from the article, the first appears to be a small interview in a highly specialized publication, the second is a personal blog of one of Huffaker's colleagues. His Google scholar profile indicates one paper with 1,000+ citations and a handful around 500, not sure I would classify this as highly influential. Can't find many other sources while doing WP:BEFORE. Doesn't seem to be notable by WP:NACADEMIC, WP:NBUSINESSPERSON, or WP:GNG. Bestagon ⬡ 20:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Computing. Bestagon ⬡ 20:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This person's publications seem to be in the realm of sociology, and I'm thinking this is not a high citation field - would like to hear other's views on that. The article is a stub that does not really focus on their academic impact - it needs fleshing out in that regard if it's to stay. Qflib (talk)
Keep. His research (at least that done before working at Google) is highly cited. It would take digging through the citing works to understand the impact. That's a big job. For the biographical information, the difficulty is that I found only one short and undated bio paragraph attached to a talk he gave - which can't be considered independent. So I think Keep based on his publications, but the bio information will remain very, very thin for now. Lamona (talk) 01:43, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments: interesting. A scholar with over a thousand cites should be notable, but there are only two cites in the stub. Not sure what to do. Bearian (talk) 03:50, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Saleem Bhatti (via WP:PROD on 12 August 2024)
Anjalika Wijesinghe (via WP:PROD on 12 August 2024)
Nahum Hofree (via WP:BLP-PROD on 11 August 2024)
Ismail Reisli (via WP:PROD on 7 August 2024)