Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cleopatra Abdou

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. Modussiccandi (talk) 08:40, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cleopatra Abdou[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)

Fails WP:PROF, all sources from her publications, in google search's results just a profiles in academic websites no independent sources or news about her, no accolades or notable work or known books, The article appears to be about an ordinary university professor.
Also, on Google Scholar she has 1864 citations (the highest one has 356 citations). Ibrahim.ID ✪ 01:06, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Egypt. Ibrahim.ID ✪ 01:13, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Accomplished and need more equitable representation on WP. 128.252.172.28 (talk) 17:20, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 17:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not seeing a pass of WP:NPROF, nor WP:NAUTHOR. WP:TOOSOON at best. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:38, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep but clean up. The heavy wikipuffery, unsourced detail, and reporting of workaday events as if they were significant (she published a journal paper!) evident in our article and the assistant professor title it gives her make her look like a typical WP:TOOSOON academic, written about here before they have had time to make an impact. Maybe that was true in 2014 when the article was written, and I can see from that why the article was nominated for deletion. But I hope commenters here will do their own checks rather than relying on the state of the article to do it for them. Her Google Scholar profile [1] shows five publications with triple-digit citations, arguably enough for WP:PROF#C1 even in a high-citation field. And she is less junior than our article makes out: current profiles [2] list her as associate professor, a vote of confidence from her employer. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:40, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Still TOOSOON. This is a field where a 2008 PhD with 5 papers who seems to have left the field after graduating can have 987 citations (top 5: 523, 182, 163, 78, 38). Scopus went down for me in the middle of pulling data, but her 8 least-published coauthors with ≥4 papers have an average of 419 citations (median: 239), 13 papers (12), h-index of 7 (8), and top citations of 134 (72), 75 (57), 57 (32), 39 (26), and 30 (24). Her 47 other coauthors will have much better stats than that, which leads me to believe her citation profile (citations: 996; papers: 23; h-index: 16; top 5 papers: 171, 158, 122, 58, 49) is not nearly at the level warranting a standalone biography in her subfield. I'll update with full coauthor metrics once Scopus starts cooperating. JoelleJay (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, Scopus is working again. Here are the metrics for her 46 coauthors with 4+ papers:
Total citations: average: 4367, median: 2062, Abdou: 996

Total papers: avg: 84, med: 60, A: 23

h-index: avg: 27, med: 22, A: 16

Top 5 papers: 1st: avg: 497, med: 272, A: 171; 2nd: avg: 253, med: 185, A: 158; 3rd: avg: 200, med: 159, A: 122; 4th: 163, med: 125, A: 58; 5th: avg: 146, med: 105, A: 49.

The "average professor test" would indicate we should wait another few years before reevaluating her notability for a standalone. JoelleJay (talk) 04:50, 30 June 2022 (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.