Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hermione Ruck Keene

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:51, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hermione Ruck Keene[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)

Unremarkable person   Kadzi   (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   Kadzi   (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I asked for the other page to be deleted because I misspelt “Keene” so I used the template to delete it promptly and created a new article with the correct spelling.--EsotericJoe (talk) 18:27, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If one uses the available ways to find sources then he or she can see that results of Keene are found.--EsotericJoe (talk) 19:38, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article is heavily padded with non-independent sources of non-accomplishments, and I was not able to find anything better (such as heavy citations or in-depth news coverage of the subject) that would allow her to pass WP:PROF, WP:AUTHOR, or WP:GNG. Sourcing is sparse enough that the newly-created article appears to have misstated her academic rank and affiliation — it says only she is associate lecturer at Exeter but she appears to also hold a position as senior lecturer at Oxford Brookes. (Or maybe is in the process of moving from one to the other.) Her precise rank is not directly a notability issue but the confusion over this issue demonstrates that proper sourcing is problematic here, and illustrates why we should not have articles in such cases. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:07, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Tiny cites on GS. Notability not found. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:27, 31 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Delete She doesn't have a sufficiently senior academic post to establish notability on that ground, nor has her research been particularly cited. She hasn't won any discernible awards, and while there is some press coverage of her, it seems anecdotal and doesn't demonstrate her notability. Pi (Talk to me!) 00:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My search in Google Scholar found only a few citations and I found nothing to show any of the notability criteria at WP:NPROF are met. It doesn't appear that there is enough significant independent coverage of her to show that she meets WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 00:05, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a non-notable academic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:13, 2 June 2020 (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.