Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Culliney

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 no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Culliney

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

Prolific author, but does he meet the WP:GNG? Polarpanda (talk) 19:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Has been publishing since 1970. GS h index = 7. Seems not to have achieved WP notability unless something else emerges. Xxanthippe (talk).

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has published three Sierra Club books, a very popular and well-received line of books in its pre-internet day. Google books search shows enough references in popular literature and in magazines like Nature to support notability, although this is an article that probably requires print resources. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Apparently, there's also a businessperson by this name who isn't from Hawaii. Anyone looking for sources, shouldn't mix them up. I have insufficient information to make a decision. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:17, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I think he has enough books from notable publishers. But the article needs to be cleaned up badly. I am going to add edit tags accordingly. Doomsdayer520 (Talk|Contribs) 13:12, 16 December 2009 (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.