Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rose Funja

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. Sandstein 11:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rose Funja[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)

Fails GNG. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:14, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:50, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:50, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:52, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - dean of science at a university, inventor. Bearian (talk) 13:28, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete being a dean at a university does not pass any notability guidelines for academics. You need either a named chair, significant contributions to your field, or to be the leading academic offier, either president/chancellor or in some places vice chancellor where the chancellor is just a figure head. The provost might also be notable, but not every dean, even though at some places all the people who reach the rank of dean may end up being notable because of named chairs or academic contribution. Being an inventor also does not make one notable. My father has over 20 aptents, some such as the brake fluid sensor were used in multiple General Motors factories and thus in probably millions or at least thousands of cars. That does not make him notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:09, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnpacklambert: Can you please substantiate your claims with reference to Wiki policy? Which policy are you referencing here?Tamsier (talk) 06:10, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is what the academic notability policy says.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:57, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep A lot of resources in news [1][2]Charmk (talk) 11:11, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 11:27, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Doesn't even approach GNG. Should have been a speedy delete. Cheerio042 (talk) 19:45, 4 July 2019 (UTC) Striking blocked sock Britishfinance (talk) 10:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: sufficient coverage by RS and awards. Bondegezou (talk) 12:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 12:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, passes BASIC as a minimum.Tamsier (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. sufficient coverage, awards ArhKarl (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2019 (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.