Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simone Schaner

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:09, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Simone Schaner

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

Fails WP:ACADEMIC. Assistant professor at Dartmouth; described as "rising" in the article, which is usually a synonym for "not there yet". Google Scholar citations do not suggest that she has had a significant impact in her field at this point; maybe someday. I had speedy-deleted the article per A7, but restored it at the request of another admin. MelanieN (talk) 14:21, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. GS h-index of 7 is WP:Too soon for a well cited field. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. The subject fails WP:PROF, and the sources in the article are not independent of the subject. Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:42, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. At least borderline notable, based on the citations. The actual citation record from Google Scholar is : 106, 40, 41, 34, 42, 37, 41, 28, 30, 23, 9, 7 etc. . Normally we consider anyone who has published one of more papers with citation over 100 to be notable. Economics is a field with a medium citation density, not a high citation density such as the biomedical sciences I don't know why people keep citing a h factor as indicative of anything: giving my usual example 300, 200, 150, 50, 5, 4, 3 has h of 5, but so does 6, 5, 5, 5, 5, 4;the first is notable; the second is not. On the other hand , she is still an assistant professor. DGG ( talk ) 16:29, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 07:31, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] gives an h-index of 7. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:GNG and lacks independent secondary source - everything seems to be the work of the subject, up to an including her resume. - GretLomborg (talk) 04:14, 16 June 2017 (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.