Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandrine Matiasek

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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:15, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sandrine Matiasek[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)

Associate professor with an h-index of 8 according to Scopus, or 6 according to Google, not seeing anything that might take her past WP:NPROF. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Environment, and United States of America. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete page reads like a resume. Associate professor with little impact, WP:MILL and doesn't fulfill any WP:NACADEMIC criteria. Broc (talk) 22:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. She has good citation counts for one publication, but she is in the middle position among the authors of that one, and nothing else stands out as evidence for WP:PROF notability. That leaves a potential pass of WP:GNG instead, based on the "media appearances" section. Several of the sources listed there are non-independent (published by CSU Chico, her employer). Otherwise, we have three local news stories in NSPR and the Chico Enterprise-Record. Of these, "Chico State professors publish Camp Fire water pollution study" has little depth of coverage of Matiasek, spending more of its attention on her coauthors and their study. "Blue Dot" is a local radio station interview with the subject, not a story about her. And "Students study" is, as the title suggests, mostly about a student research project, with only incidental mention of Matiasek's role in directing the students. I don't think that's enough depth and prominence of coverage for GNG either. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete way too early with no real verification of notability as yet. Ldm1954 (talk) 04:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet WP:NACADEMIC. microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 15:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom fails WP:NACADEMIC.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:23, 4 March 2024 (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.