Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry H. Cunningham

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 Move to draft.. There is no strong support for keeping as an article, but nor is there strong support for deletion. Apart from the nomination, the only editors who have actually expressed an opinion as to what the outcome should be have suggested draftifying, and that will also keep open all options for what may become of the page in the future. JBW (talk) 21:40, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Larry H. Cunningham[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)

Fails WP:NACADEMIC and WP:GNG, no WP:SIGCOV presented - sourced to employer website, expired link and Twitter. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:35, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Law, United States of America, and New York. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:35, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: For the record, articles on academics are allowed to use their institution's website as a source. Additionally, I'm unable to find any publications by the subject. Curbon7 (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft for now. Leaning keep or move to draft following improvements. It is rare for a person to become dean of an American law school without having a solid academic reputation and prior news coverage. This is lacking from the article as written, and this may be such a rare case, but more time is likely needed to allow for research of sources. BD2412 T 17:33, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The subject seems to publish as "Larry Cunningham", so the automated searches for "Larry H. Cunningham" are not useful. There are 16 papers listed here (linked at the bottom; also has a decent profile). The GS profile is [1], showing 100, 44, 29, 26, 16 citations for top papers; I don't know the field at all, but aside from the single paper, this seems relatively low to me. Not seeing any evidence of authored books. Perhaps a case of too-early career, despite the law-school deanship? I don't see the point in moving to draft; the situation on notability is not going to change materially in 6 months, but userify might be a reasonable option if the creator desires. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I have found some instances where he was quoted in the press on matters in the news, but nothing substantial. Still, ascendancy to a law school deanship by itself usually garners some press coverage, which may yet be discovered. BD2412 T 22:35, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's quite a few hits in the WL Ebsco search including a long article mainly on the fact the law school nearly went under but is now succeeding, and focusing on the president, J. Edward Bell III: Teri Errico Griffis (2021). Transparency, reinvestment bring Charleston School of Law back from the brink. South Carolina Lawyers Weekly. Also announcement: Charleston School of Law selects new dean. Charleston Regional Business Journal Apr. 3, 2020 (266 words) and some shorter ones. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:16, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect notability within legal scholarship is not the same as most fields. While his scholarship and citations don't seem substantive in quantity, his articles have been cited favorably by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, and Supreme Courts of Minnesota, Alaska, and Mississippi. Here is a list from St. John's, and I found the MN reference using Google Scholar's Case Law. Koziarke (talk) 16:35, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 07:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft. Academic coverage of the guy should be researched and put into the article. WP:PROF Dawkin Verbier (talk) 02:54, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 12:27, 5 November 2022 (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.