Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danielle Twilley

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. Can be userfied on request via WP:REFUND. Sandstein 10:33, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle Twilley[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)

Super-early career researcher who has received an early career prize. I note that L'Oréal-UNESCO For Women in Science Awards optimistically redlinks each and every recipient, but I'm pretty certain that in this case and in absence of anything else, we are looking at a case of WP:TOOSOON. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 01:47, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 03:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 03:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 03:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 03:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 03:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 03:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A GS h-index of 6 does not remotely come up to passing WP:Prof#C1. Far WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC).[reply]
Comment as creator: I created it at an edit-a-thon from a list of possible biographies; it seemed borderline to me. So I totally get the WP:TOOSOON comment. Maybe move it to Draft space? Liannadavis (talk) 17:31, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think moving to draft makes much sense - that is only appropriate if there is an expectation that the issue (here, lack of notability) can be remedied within a short time; but we are looking at career-level time spans here. Probably several years? Drafts shouldn't sit around that long, and indeed are deleted after six months of no improvement. Deletion and recreation when/if it becomes appropriate would seem more sensible. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can move the article to draft yourself by copying its source into your sandbox. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:18, 4 December 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, that may be a good alternative. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:09, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This seems a borderline case, but it's not hard to imagine a GNG pass in the next six or twelve months (say, the L'Oréal-UNESCO award plus some news coverage of her work being licensed). I'd be happy with userfying the content as suggested above. XOR'easter (talk) 15:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy I have found and added a couple of sources, and also deleted one that had the same wording as the UNESCO page. Although the Sunday Times (South Africa) and The Citizen (South Africa) are both independent, reliable sources, they are both covering her Rising Talent award - as is the UNESCO source, so are almost WP:BLP1E. The other source I added does not have significant coverage, just says that she also received a UNESCO/L'Oréal doctoral fellowship. So, WP:TOOSOON, but probably worth keeping in the creator's sandbox for when there is more news about her. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:28, 10 December 2019 (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.