Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew J. Mitchell

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The result was speedy keep (nomination withdrawn) ‎. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 13:05, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew J. Mitchell[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Notability is suspect. Only current references are reviews of books written or edited by him. Fails WP:NACADEMIC and WP:ANYBIO and WP:SIGCOV Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Numerous reviews and library holdings show notability according to WP:NACADEMIC and WP:ANYBIO and WP:SIGCOV. Ali Pirhayati (talk) 17:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Google Scholar indicates 1086 citations. I know citation rates vary by discipline; how does this stack up in Philosophy? Does it matter that he's a full professor at Emory University, a top university?

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I initially thought that his professorship at Emory University made him notable, but I don't think that position is a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 20:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Google Scholar citations: I know nil about citation levels in any discipline, but I note that the citations are smeared across 80 works, the most cited of which has 223 citations – roughly one fifth of the total. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 21:08, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Philosophy is apt to be a book-oriented discipline, where having published books that have received reviews is a more clear indicator of article-worthiness than a citation profile. Mitchell has two solo-author books that have received multiple reviews apiece, which is enough for WP:NAUTHOR; the multiply-reviewed co-edited volumes count for less, since co-editing is less of a contribution than writing the whole thing, but they don't hurt. XOR'easter (talk) 22:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per XOR'easter.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 05:14, 8 August 2023 (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.