Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sinclair Mayne

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) Erik9 (talk) 02:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sinclair Mayne

Delete disputed prod; fails WP:GNG; claims awards from redlink organizations but no showing that the awards are notable much less the conferees. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 18:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. He seems to be quite prominent in Northern Irish agriculture and known internationally for his expertise. There's a plausible (though weak) case for WP:PROF criteria #1, #2, and #6. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:12, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The award, presidency of BSAS and overall research output add up to meet WP:PROF criterion #1 (significant impact in scholarly discipline, broadly construed), or very close, even if we were to argue criteria 2 and 6 are not met. I think this Google News search is telling, and indicates notability, even though this Google Scholar search suggests that his citation impact is relatively low. I say “relatively” because the subject is known in a very specialized and applied area, which may not be very dense in terms of citations.--Eric Yurken (talk) 20:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Week Keep on balance, though its a field where it is very hard to tell--only one criterion in WP:PROF has to be met. This is a little below par in individual items, but I think the sum is just sufficient. DGG (talk) 02:32, 28 April 2009 (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.