Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Cave

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 per DGG. Black Kite 12:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Cave[edit]

Fails WP:PROF. No indication of awards, expert in any category, well known body of work, etc. Rtphokie (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Racepacket (talk) 18:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- Lquilter (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there does not seem to be sufficient coverage by third-parties that would allow the article to grow beyond a permanent shortish stub. Pichpich (talk) 15:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep based on Google scholar citation results. I also found a couple news stories where he is mentioned, but only in a trivial way as supplying a quote on someone else's research, so I don't think that helps much. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete notability and WP:PROF - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --PeaceNT (talk) 20:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Cave is a full professor-- at a significant research university, with numerous publications; the publications and the citations to them establish the notability. Professor become notable by dint of their research and the recognition by the community as given by peer review and citation is the external RS for that. Notability is judged by the standards of their profession. So, what are his papers and their citations? He has 36 peer-reviewed papers in Web of Scienc, which is good, but not exceptional. But his most cited paper, in JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE Volume: 15 Issue: 3 Pages: 419-433 Published: 1989 is cited 645 times and his next most cited, ins cited 303 times. This is notability by any standard for a researcher. DGG (talk) 04:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per DGG. Minos P. Dautrieve (talk) 00:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. DGG's analysis is persuasive.--Kubigula (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2008 (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.