Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nerilie Abram

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. Michig (talk) 18:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nerilie Abram[edit]

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

I prodded this but the prod tag was removed without any reason given. My concern is that I don't believe that she meets WP:NACADEMICS. She doesn't seem to have made a impact as required by #1, she has always been part of a team doing research Gbawden (talk) 13:52, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I removed the prod after expanding the article, adding additional sourcing from the Canberra Times, on her involvemnt with Climate change which the article states her research is in direct conflict with the Australian Prime Minister. Additional source http://www.sostariffe.it/news/lantartide-ruba-le-piogge-australiane-116737/ in an Italian newspaper also about climate change in Antarctica show she meets WP:Notability.. Gnan garra 15:52, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - I can understand why this article was nominated because it read like a short CV of a junior academic. However, Abram's recent research has been reported in multiple news sources, which suggests she's having a wider impact. Sionk (talk) 19:45, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 01:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:05, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:06, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria at WP:NACADEMICS. However, a number of news sources do name her as a lead researcher in a study into climate change. That established Notability. AlanS (talk) 13:53, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An untenured junior academic not yet passing WP:PROF, with an h-index of 15. There is very limited news coverage -- not enough for WP:GNG. And she does not seem to be a "lead researcher" -- being "lead author" on a few papers is not quite the same thing. -- 101.117.90.101 (talk) 00:54, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep first author on some very highly cited papers. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:38, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep various additional information and sources added to profile, demonstrating suitability for article to be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icytimes (talk • contribs) 22:14, 19 August 2014 (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.