Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herb Howe
Appearance
- 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Herb Howe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:NPROF and WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, United States of America, and Nebraska. UtherSRG (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- delete fails WP:NPROF both #1 and 6 since he never occupied the highest administration post at UNL (but was a chief of staff). --hroest 15:15, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: given his rank and the handful of double-digit citation figures I found on google scholar, I suspect he may be notable, but searching is somewhat complicated given the time period and the fact that there are several publishing Herbert Howes. He published as "Herbert E. Howe Jr.", for anyone who wants to take up the search. -- asilvering (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. "Herbert E. Howe" in GS gives four papers with moderate citations (71,47,40,39) but I'm not sure that's quite enough to meet WP:PROF by citations; also there seem to be two distinct topic areas so not 100% sure they are all this subject. Not seeing anything else in the article to help with notability. The memorial bio linked does not talk about his research at all.[1]. He might be one of those extremely meritorious individuals in their community who nevertheless does not meet WP's requirements for an article. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Hard to see how this article lasted as long as it did after being tagged 13 years ago. Not notable and should be deleted. Go4thProsper (talk) 16:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Saw the same 4 papers but no other coverage at all. Nothing. Fails WP:NPROF, WP:SIGCOV. scope_creepTalk 10:23, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- 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.