Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ragnar Löfstedt

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. (non-admin closure) Szzuk (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ragnar Löfstedt[edit]

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

I don't think he's notable enough to have an article as there aren't any outside references to him linked outside of staff directories and industry interviews Zubin12 (talk) 08:57, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:08, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:08, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:08, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NPROF and possibly WP:AUTHOR. Prince of Thieves (talk) 10:07, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NPROF And WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "Professor" in the UK generally means more than in the US, possibly enough for WP:PROF#C5, and being a Fellow of the Society for Risk Analysis might be enough for #C3 depending on how selective it is. But he more clearly passes #C1 for his highly cited publications [1], likely passes WP:AUTHOR for his books, and definitely passes #C8 as editor-in-chief of the Journal of Risk Research. Any one of these would be enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2018 (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.