Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graham Hitch

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 keep. Courcelles 01:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Graham Hitch[edit]

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

Tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't establish notability Boleyn (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. I would like to remind the nominator of WP:BEFORE - if you had checked Google Scholar, you would see that the top result has 13,311 citations. Hitch's h-index is 43. Please do this sort of check in the future. St Anselm (talk) 20:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clear pass of WP:PROF#C1. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- If this were on a US professor (with the much lower significance of the title there), I would have voted to delete. In UK, only the top academcis get the title professor. If two universities successively think him notable enough to appoint him a professor, WP should agree. He has probably published a good number of articles etc, but at presetn we merely have a stub article. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep. Very high cites in GS. It would be helpful if the nominator did not waste our time with more nominations like this. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:12, 20 January 2013 (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.