Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators

This listing is for biographical articles on academics. Please see WP:BIO for guidelines on the inclusion of biographical articles in general and WP:ACADEMIC for the widely-used notability standard for academics. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Education for a general list of deletion debates related to education, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Schools for deletion debates about educational institutions.

Shortcuts

WP:DSPROF
WP:AFD/PROF

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Academics and educators. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Academics and educators|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Academics and educators.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Academics and educators[edit]

Paulin Basinga publications[edit]

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

There is no reason to have a list of someone's publications on Wikipedia, this is what Google Scholar and Research Gate etc are for. Since a PROD was contested, it has to go to AfD (perhaps speedy delete). This page should not be merged to Paulin Basinga as a long list is not useful in a BLP. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: it's odd that the article about the person isn't linked, but they have one. This list isn't needed, and I have my doubts the individual is notable either. Most ref's in their article seem to be interviews in Nigerian media, none from his home country. Suspect more "pay to publish" notability... Oaktree b (talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've also nominated the article on Paulin Basinga for deletion, does not appear notable either. Oaktree b (talk) 15:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maeve Kennedy McKean[edit]

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

Bringing this here because I expect it to be complex and I'm not sure whether a merger or a move is the right outcome, and given the subject matter it's too complex for a talk page.

Townsend/McKean's death was in the news because she was a Kennedy who died young/tragically. While there is sourcing for items that pre-dated her death, none of those positions convey notability, nor did her CUNY role nor her son's role as the first great grandchild of RFK & Ethel. Most of the coverage of her work came to light not because of her work while alive but in light of her death. I don't believe her death was notable as it was ruled an accidental drowning. A merge to her mother is possible as this article could be trimmed without losing much.

Thoughts? Ideas? Suggestions. Star Mississippi 03:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Politics, and Maryland. Star Mississippi 03:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is no need for hair-splitting about notability criteria here (which have historically been unevenly applied on WP anyway). This is a well-sourced biographical article that improves Wikipedia rather than detracts from it. rspεεr (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article is well sourced and details her work, not just her death or status as a Kennedy. She was not just "A Kennedy who died young" (40 isn't necessarily young). She was a public health official and a member of the Obama Administration. Her death amplified more of this coverage, which in turn built more credible sources to establish notability. It doesn't matter when or how coverage of her work came to be. Many sources on historic figures were written well after a subject's death. Some people were lost to history, yet once written about, they become notable. You may not "believe her death was notable" but it was covered in international and national news sources for weeks. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 20:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ralph Bernstein[edit]

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

Promotional/UPE. Engineer did engineering things. UtherSRG (talk) 18:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Engineering, Germany, and United States of America. UtherSRG (talk) 18:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, utterly ordinary career. Also, the article was created by a banned sockpuppet, a paid editor. — Biruitorul ^Talk 18:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - 100% agree MaskedSinger (talk) 08:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In what universe is being elected a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) an "utterly ordinary career"? The notability of researchers in industry as well as academia are covered by WP:NPROF which assesses notability by their impact on their field. He meets criteria #3: The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers or Honorary Fellow of the Institute of Physics). StarryGrandma (talk) 05:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. IEEE Fellow is a clear pass of WP:PROF#C3, one of the main examples used in WP:PROF of the sort of thing that passes that criterion. G5 speedy is not in play because the article was created before anyone was indeffed (which is, by the way, not the same thing as banned). And in what universe would, say, "professional athlete did professional athlete things" be regarded as a valid deletion rationale, or "100% agree" be regarded as a substantial contribution to a deletion discussion? —David Eppstein (talk) 05:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. WP:Prof#C3 is passed. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Keep: Clear C3 pass as an IEEE fellow. Curbon7 (talk) 22:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rashad Richey[edit]

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

Doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability standards, most of the sources cited lead back to pages from his own website and/or really low-quality suspect sources. I suspect this guy created his own Wikipedia page. Perfecnot (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and United States of America. Perfecnot (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Audacity and various streaming links, his own website and PR items. Sourcing now in the article is a blog, a PR item and his college. Very non-notable, very PROMO. Delete for lack of reliable sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 22:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Absolutely no sign of WP:NPROF, though I saw this on the Academics and Educators delsorting. I do see an NBC piece [1] and an Atlanta Voice piece [2], mostly aimed towards his radio show. Agree that there is a lot of promotionalism. A sensible alternative to deletion might be to redirect to a stub on the radio show. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 00:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Politics, and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Fritz Behrendt[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years. Possible that WP:NPROF is met but I'm not finding the sources to show it JMWt (talk) 08:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Social science, and Germany. JMWt (talk) 08:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. His book Sozial Strategie für Entwicklungsländer has high citations in Google Scholar, but that's the only one. The authority control box links to an entry in the Historical Dictionary of Switzerland, which may meet WP:ANYBIO #3. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep . Have added some refs (Two reviews of one of his books) and two things by Katja Windisch (Windisch, Katja (2005) Shaping Social Change. The development sociology of Richard F. Behrendt, Bern , pp. 19-31. (Gestalten sozialen Wandels. Die Entwicklungssoziologie Richard F. Behrendts, Social Strategies, Vol. 39, Bern: Peter Lang Verlag, 2005, 259 S.) AND Windisch, Katja (2002) Betrachtungen zur Sozialen Entwicklungsstrategie und Sozioökonomie Richard F. Behrendts. Soziale Phänomene als Vorbedingungen ökonomischer Entwicklung, in: Victoria Jäggi, Ueli Mäder, Katja Windisch (Hrsg.): Entwicklung, Recht, sozialer Wandel. Festschrift für Paul Trappe zum 70. Geburtstag, Social Strategies, Vol. 35, Bern: Peter Lang Verlag, S. 74-84.).(https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Gestalten_sozialen_Wandels/xX8mWf7_3rUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Richard+Behrendt%22+-wikipedia+Windisch&pg=PA19&printsec=frontcover) These seem to me sufficient to allow a clear pass of WP:prof. (Msrasnw (talk) 13:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Gregg Henriques[edit]

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

Given that most external links go to either gregghenriques.com or unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org and not to very many well-known independent sources that would significantly cover him, I have a suspicion that this article might not survive the AfD test in its current state. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Psychology, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suheir Abu Oksa Daoud[edit]

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

Does not fulfill the requirements for WP:Notability, not enough indepedent sigcov could be found either in the article or through own search. WP:NACADEMICS is not met either. FortunateSons (talk) 10:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. FortunateSons (talk) 10:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. FortunateSons (talk) 10:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (nominator) All independent coverage is very minor and focussed on some area of research, I could not find enough coverage that is both significant and independent. No indication of meeting WP:NACADEMICS could be found. Almost all content is sourced from obviously non-independent sources.FortunateSons (talk) 10:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A nomination is already a vote for deletion, please remove your bolded vote. You're just restating your nomination. nableezy - 03:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, ~~striken~~ struck FortunateSons (talk) 09:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Um, in English one writes 'struck', unless you are thinking of 'stricken', which is something commonplace in I/P realities.Nishidani (talk) 11:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that was a poor translation from my native language, my bad FortunateSons (talk) 11:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Especially with the new additions, the article adequately establishes notability. Zero^talk 01:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Poetry, Politics, California, Massachusetts, and South Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Christian Hackett[edit]

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

Not notable. Appears to be promotional. Pprsmv (talk) 15:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. Likely autobiography. I found a capsule review of Quiet powers of the possible (ProQuest 1807074607) and a review of his co-translation of Wahl (ProQuest 2371191098). Outside the Gates does not appear to be notable; I couldn't find any significant independent coverage of it. This falls short of WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NACADEMIC in my opinion. Jfire (talk) 16:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quiet Powers seems highly notable in the field of Continental Philosophy. Besides the review noted, I located scholarly reviews here and here:

ffrench, Patrick. Review of Quiet Powers of the Possible: Interviews in Contemporary French Phenomenology, by Tarek R. Dika, W. Chris Hackett. French Studies: A Quarterly Review, vol. 71 no. 3, 2017, p. 450-451. Project MUSE muse.jhu.edu/article/666301.

Notre Dame Philosophy Reviews, https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/quiet-powers-of-the-possible-interviews-in-contemporary-french-phenomenology/

Quiet Powers book is an important achievement and was published in the most prestigious book series (Perspectives in Continental Philosophy) in English dealing with Continental Philosophy.

Hackett's edition of Wahl’s Human Existence and Transcendence was reviewed here:

https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/human-existence-and-transcendence/

and here (Continental Philosophy Review, the premier journal in its field):

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11007-020-09488-8

These reviews show it is a notable acheivement by returning Wahl back to prominence in contemporary Continental Philosophy in English as well as recovering an historical witness to philosophical engagement in France during the Occupation and the Holocaust. The book, in French, is commonly called a "watershed" and its English translation is a big deal.

Hackett's writings and translations are published in major academic publishers that form the upper echelon of his academic field(s) (Fordham UP, Northwestern UP, Bloomsbury Academic, University of Virginia Press, University of Notre Dame Press, most notably) and his translations and monographs have been reviewed in the most significant outlets in modern theology (incl. Modern Theology itself) and continental philosophy (Cont. Phil Review, Notre Dame Phil Reviews, etc). A look at his CV on Academia.edu shows that he has published dozens of articles in most of these outlets as well, and has publications, beyond English-lang journals, are found in Hungarian, French, and Spanish outlets.

Dr. Hackett's Outside the Gates was reviewed here: https://europeanconservative.com/articles/reviews/a-philosophical-adventure-towards-freedom/

Based on this, Hackett should be called a central figure in French Phenomenology, Continental Philosophy, and has made significant contributions to Catholic Theology from out of this nexus.

As a key figure in the reception of French Phenomenology into English via translation and publication, as an author developing a constructive philosophical vision based on this reception, I would say he's a notable figure in his academic fields.

The problem with this article is that it frames Hackett as a novelist instead of a philosopher. 216.249.67.21 (talk) 15:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Continental Philosophy review is the same one that I found, but I agree that the other sources put him over the threshold, and now that Wglegoman has address the WP:PROMO issues I'm happy to switch to keep. Jfire (talk) 03:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Philosophy, Christianity, England, Australia, Indiana, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current page does not contain sufficient external evidence of notability to retain. I haven't done a full search online/offline to see if there is something else to bring it up to line, but since it very clearly smells like an autobiography, if it's not improved before the end of discussion, it looks like a delete. @Jrife's analysis is sound. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See improved article. Wglegoman (talk) 19:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep ~~Delete- a search of google scholar doesn't turn up anything that would imply he meets WP:PROF~~ Psychastes (talk) 04:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He publishes under several variations: W. C. Hackett, William C. Hackett, William Christian Hackett, W. Chris Hackett. I think that is it. His scholarly profile opens up more with that in mind. Wglegoman (talk) 19:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, nice catch there, yeah. I see the sources you've added, he should meet WP:PROF based on those reviews of his book. Psychastes (talk) 20:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo Tasca (professor)[edit]

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

Previously deleted and salted as Paolo Tasca * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Economics, Computing, Italy, and England. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- I don't have access to the deleted versions of the article, but since it has been deleted and salted, the level of improvement to notability needs to be higher than typical to keep, and I don't see a WP:PROF pass here that would warrant it. But UCL is a significant university, so I don't want to be too hasty -- salting seems to me to be primarily based on a "wasting the community's time" basis and not on a "this person couldn't possibly be notable" one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Note that he's actually only an associate professor, not a full professor. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Van Doren[edit]

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

Not notable and possibly a promotional page for the subject. Most of the article is about the subject's notable family (covered in other Wikipedia entries). Sources confirm that the subject is painter but not one whose work is widely-known or award-winning. Pprsmv (talk) 08:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Authors, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Aye, there's a whole lot of fluff here; over half the text in the article is who the subject's related to, to whom he's married, that notable people once owned his studio, etc etc etc. Strip away all the dross and refbombing, and this guy's just another painter and non-notable junior academic. Ravenswing 18:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete notability is not inherited. A line about a grandson in one of the other family articles seems to be the right amount of information for the current position. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article does not specifically focus on the subject and tries to show notability by mentioning other people's names.Southati (talk) 12:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No news coverage specifically on the subject. Agree with above arguments. Perfectstrangerz (talk) 01:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nek Muhammad Shaikh[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Clearly does not meet WP:NPROF Flounder fillet (talk) 18:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Academics and educators. Flounder fillet (talk) 18:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. samee converse 20:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Good catch! fails WP:GNG as well. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 20:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:36, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not pass WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete -- the only citation for the notability of this assistant professor is a run-of-a-mill list of awards given by the university to its profs. WP does lack articles on prominent Pakistani and other South Asian academics, so we should move more slowly here when evaluating, but based on the article there isn't enough to pass the average professor test. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG/ WP:NPROF.Southati (talk) 14:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rosamund Else-Mitchell[edit]

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

Fairly random person; article written by an admitted paid editor. Biruitorul ^Talk 12:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 1 gnews says it all. Fails WP:BIO and possible promotional article. LibStar (talk) 23:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Educator did education things, then became publisher and did publishing things. Lacks WP:SIGCOV references, so fails WP:ANYBIO. UtherSRG (talk) 11:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The EdTech Digest top 100 movers in education/technology mention gave me a minute to pause, because it sounds like a significant feat. But I can't find any evidence online that EdTech Digest is itself notable (or anything but an advertising platform). Without that independent evidence of notability, I need to agree with the Delete votes above.
Delete Article subject fails WP:GNG, most of the references are PDF links & I also don't think linkedin can be use as a reference as well.--Meligirl5 (talk) 17:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - couldn't agree more especially with the Linkedin! MaskedSinger (talk) 08:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anuradha Bhattacharyya[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Main claim to fame in lede appears to be winning an Chandigarh Sahitya Akademi, but that's not supported by the refs (one ref just mentions that she was selected to give away the award), and her name is not mentioned anywhere here (in the English or Hindi sections, at least). I don't see WP:SIGCOV and any other reliable sources in the article, just bibiographies and mentions. Was deleted previously by AfD and quickly recreated by the original author soon after. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:08, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Women, Poetry, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Can we find published reviews of her novels that aren't tainted by paid placements (WP:NEWSORGINDIA)? If so that could be a clearer path to notability than debating whether the award she won is significant. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://edurank.org/uni/jadavpur-university/alumni/

It says she is among 46 notable alumni based on google search of her name (in spite of being often mispelt as bhattacharya by searchers.

https://edurank.org/uni/indian-institute-of-technology-kharagpur/alumni/

It seems to me that no one noticed the recent book Light Inspired. It is the life-story of a notable person named Deep Narayan Nayak. He has recently won a UNESCO medal for social work/educationist. I was intending to give his reference from youtube when the bot disallowed it. After that I received the nomination for deltion notice. What an irony! Atul Bhattacharyya (talk) 21:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Certainly no pass of WP:Prof. Notability will have to be found under GNG, but I don't see enough strong independent sources yet. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/chandigarh/honour-for-17-authors-by-csa-52965 Cash prize mentioned. The Chandigarh Sahitya Akademi is the State Award in Literature. Without 'Chandigarh', Sahitya Akademi is the National award.

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/features/sahitya-akademi-honour-for-writers-384418 This was in 2017 for the book One Word, same government body.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190204231321/http://chdpr.gov.in/dashboard/sites/default/files/Commendation%20Certificates%20for%20distinguished%20service.pdf This one is the State Honour from the government presented on the Republic Day of India, state level. For this, a police verification is conducted for eligibility. It is not a small matter to receive this honour in India. Atul Bhattacharyya (talk) 16:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This looks like a paid Job or an intention to promote subject article on wikipedia. I was just taking a look at the external link section and after clicking the twitter link I found out that the subject has already started promoting her wikipedia page by using the twitter link on her bio.

https://twitter.com/AnuradhaAuthor Beside that, subject article fails WP:GNG.--Meligirl5 (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not a notable figure, and i also supports the Nominator's views. TheChronikler7 (talk) 06:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't appear to be notable and somewhat vanity article. RationalPuff (talk) 22:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaston Gelos[edit]

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

Checking notability. Dejaqo (talk) 20:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Businesspeople, Germany, Economics and Uruguay. Dejaqo (talk) 20:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Following a review of the article and its sources, I made some changes. With sources like [3], [4] an other citations in that, notability can be clearly demonstrated. Also he is frequently quoted by major financial media outlets including Bloomberg, CNBC, and the Financial Times, as an economist. Southati (talk) 14:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Looking on GS under both RG Gelos and Gaston Gelos seems sufficiently well cited for a pass of WP:Prof. (Msrasnw (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Pierre Gervois[edit]

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

Pretty random artist; article authored by a suspected paid editor. Biruitorul ^Talk 15:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: in general sources of WP:YOUTUBE are not notable and usable except under specific criteria. most sources are not independent of author. User:Sawerchessread (talk) 16:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NARTIST. Theroadislong (talk) 19:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PROMO, largely sourced to his university or personal websites. I don't find mention of this person elsewhere online. Oaktree b (talk) 19:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The best I could find for a reliable source was a three-sentence mention in a Spokane newspaper. Curiocurio (talk) 21:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NARTIST. YouTube links are highly promotional. Not enough coverage by reliable sources to establish notability of the subject. - Tumbuka Arch (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I found one detailed source about the subject:
1. Sawyer, Matthew Lee (2022). Make It in America: How International Companies and Entrepreneurs Can Successfully Enter and Scale in U.S. Markets. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. pp. 55–56. ISBN 978-1-119-88514-6. Retrieved 2024-04-13 – via Google Books.
  The book provides 664 words of coverage about the subject. The book notes: "Pierre Gervois is an artist, author, teacher, and entrepreneur. He grew up in a conservative, traditional French family in Paris. When Pierre told his parents that he wanted to study modern art, they insisted he pursue a more predictable career in business, law, or engineering. He followed their wishes, earning a master's degree in political science and constitutional law at Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris. Unknown to them, though, during those years he also created 500 paintings and drawings."
  The book notes: "In addition to his entrepreneurial venture, Pierre rekindled his passion for art. With downtime during the 2020 pandemic, he created a website to show his paintings, drawings, and digital artwork. Within six weeks, he sold five pieces. The website also caught the attention of a New York City art gallery that wanted to exhibit his work."
If there was one more good source, then Pierre Gervois would meet the notability guideline. The other sources I found were passing mentions or quotes from him in the media.
Cunard (talk) 00:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because with only one good source, Pierre Gervois does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline or Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria. I support recreation if a second good reliable source becomes available. Cunard (talk) 09:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update — the article creator has been blocked indefinitely for undisclosed paid editing. — Biruitorul ^Talk 19:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Artist did arts. No WP:SIGCOV references, so fails WP:ANYBIO. UtherSRG (talk) 11:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: For all the above reasons (notability & banned creator).Southati (talk) 13:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: - Not notable. Fails WP:NARTIST, WP:ANYBIO too & also it is an undisclosed paid editing. Hkkingg (talk) 11:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Gohar[edit]

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

Little evidence of NPROF: citation record is wholly inadequate, and student awards don't count for much. There is some human-interest type coverage in conjunction with an ancient whale he was involved in studying, but I think that it is at best a WP:BLP1E, with coverage all around Aug/Sep 2023. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, and Egypt. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: phd students usually dont have enough of academic notability. maybe merge relevant info into Tutcetus User:Sawerchessread (talk) 16:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

also should delete based on WP:NOTRESUME User:Sawerchessread (talk) 16:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. "pursuing a Ph.D. ... at Oklahoma State University", so he's not there yet. Maybe some time in the future. Athel cb (talk) 16:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add a comment here, though I still think it's too soon. In some countries (Chile, for example, which I know far better than I know Egypt) it's not unusual to advance a long way in one's research career, and even acquire an international reputation, well before finishing one's doctorate. Getting a doctorate takes a long time, because unless one comes from a wealthy family one needs to work almost full-time as a university teacher at the same time. I don't know how much, if at all, that applies to Abdullah Gohar. Athel cb (talk) 09:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: How notable are the awards listed? Oaktree b (talk) 19:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not very. They are discussed here [5]. One is for "Student fieldwork in vertebrate paleontology", the other "To enable scientists from economically developing nations to present research at the SVP Annual Meeting". Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:05, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- Athel cb's comments are very important to take into account. (in music, a lot of significant performers get their doctorates much later when they are financially secure enough to take the time off after their careers have already passed a notability stage), but typically the recognition of prior work + recent studies pays off in the form of indepedent coverage, and I'm not seeing it here. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PROF - thesis was less than 3 years ago - and WP:TOOSOON applies. Bearian (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm skeptical of why? What is WP:NPROF if the individual's research has appeared on a notable coverage which i can see through ABC news. I don't know how notable is the award, but it seems to be from a notable academy or institution which meets the policies and guidelines. Though it looks like TOOSOON, do deletion appy here? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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) Shadow311 (talk) 15:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Viveka Adelswärd[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a writer, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for writers. The attempted notability claim here is a language conservation award, which would be fine if the article were properly sourced but is in no way "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to pass WP:GNG, but the article as written is completely unsourced.
As I can't read Swedish, I'm perfectly willing to withdraw this if somebody who can read Swedish can find enough sourcing to salvage it, but she isn't exempted from having to have any sourcing just because the article has the word "award" in it. Bearcat (talk) 14:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Sweden. Bearcat (talk) 14:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Language. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think the article has been dragged up to the bare minimum, source-wise, and I'm convinced there's more which could be done. I found a couple of longer newspaper sources in the Swedish newspaper database sv:Mediearkivet, which collects a lot of newspaper articles from the last 10–15 years (and some older ones, but coverage gets sketchy). She was one of the hosts of Sommar (radio program) in the early 90s, which is considered quite a big thing. There's a lot of trivial coverage from back then, but at least one article in Aftonbladet from 2 August 1992 which seems promising – the Royal Library of Sweden has a lot of scanned newspaper articles where you can only see very short snippets, but where you need to get to the library or to one of a small number of university computers with access. More work to do, but I think it can be kept with the current amount of sourcing. /Julle (talk) 21:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - as there also is a festschrift for her 60th birthday, satisfying WP:PROF criteria 1c. //Replayful (talk | contribs) 09:57, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets WP:PROF. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Festschrift honoring her work is independent coverage of notability unless demonstratably tainted, which I cannot find evidence of here. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Replayful and Mscuthbert. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP as Google Books search yields enough coverage for WP:BLP. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep extensively quoted as an expert in Swedish litterature on communication, per GNG. Draken Bowser (talk) 07:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Julle. Southati (talk) 14:42, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Julle and Twinkle1990 -- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 17:56, 17 April 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.

Ninoslav Marina[edit]

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

Poorly-sourced autobiography of a person who tried so hard to promote themselves that their name ended up on the global title blacklist. No clear evidence of notability * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, Engineering, Technology, and North Macedonia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:24, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly fails WP:GNG as none of the cited sources cover the subject in depth. If sources are found, please ping me.-- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 21:49, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no evident notability in the article and very obviously written by it's subject as a résumé page. InDimensional (talk) 21:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per above, not notable. He is not currently the Rector, and I have major reservations about the University. Looking at their 2022 graduation photo https://uist.edu.mk/about/gallery/patrons-day-graduation-ceremony/ it does not look notable to me. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
N.B., I did an AfD on the university, University of Information Science and Technology. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The former rector of a major academic institution would generally be notable, but I don't think this is a major academic institution; little other sign of notability. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hold -- The qualifications for Marina to pass the AfD stem entirely based on whether UIST in Macedeonia is considered notable. If it is, then there is a pass of WP:PROF on the precedent that the top-level official at a significant university is notable. If it is not found to be notable, then there isn't enough here to keep. But subjective judgments on whether the graduation photo looks glamorous enough are not policy. (And current vs. former holder of an office is explicitly not a criterion for notability). For more, see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/University_of_Information_Science_and_Technology_"St._Paul_The_Apostle". My !vote is whatever the conclusion of that AfD ends up being. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mscuthbert, the WP:NPROF guideline is that UIST should be a major academic institution for rectors to be considered notable. This is surely a much stricter standard than notability, and I don't see anyone arguing that the institution is major. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The cases I can remember (going through AfD for academics for about 16 years), the cases where top academics at higher education have been deleted have entirely been non-notable universities (which the AfD for UIST will determine), community colleges, and small, independent theological seminaries. I believe that the bar for "major" has often been at about that level. I can't recall a president/VC/Rector of a research institute being deleted for their university not being sufficiently "major". -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 11:17, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lui Morais[edit]

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

Sources are entirely works by him, not works about him. Article is on the global title blacklist due to cross-wiki spamming * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:13, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Philosophy, Poetry, and Brazil. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This truely fails WP:GNG as none of the cited sources are independent of the subject. Redivivus carmina and Laboratório de letras are just personal blogspots.-- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 21:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I only see hits for a soccer player Junior Morais, nothing about this person. I don't see notability. Most sources used are non RS as well. Oaktree b (talk) 22:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 16:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- the Journal de Poesia biography looked like it might be independent evidence of notability, but the Journal seems more a directory of every Brazillian poet with thousands listed (the "A" list is over 400 long), so not particularly selective or confiring of notability. I didn't see much else beyond this. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing demonstrates WP:RELIABLE sources independent of the subject and fails WP:GNG -- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 17:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cordula Kropp[edit]

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

WP:BLP of an academic, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for academics. As always, academics are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show sourcing that properly verifies that they meet certain specific criteria for inclusion -- but this has no footnotes at all, and just contextlessly lists a couple of primary sources (i.e. her own faculty profiles on the self-published websites of her own employers and a directory entry) that aren't support for notability.
This was, further, created in draftspace by a brand new user and then immediately moved into mainspace by the same user without WP:AFC review practically the moment they had accumulated 10 edits for the purposes of gaining autoconfirmed privileges -- which is not the proper process for article creation either.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have any third-party sourcing besides her own staff profiles from directly affiliated entities. Bearcat (talk) 15:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Germany. Bearcat (talk) 15:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This seems to be a translation of the corresponding article in German at de:Cordula Kropp. A Google Scholar search shows various publications with each publication's number of references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 16:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, a page being a translation of a page in another language Wikipedia is not in and of itself grounds for keeping it — in order to be kept, the page has to be properly referenced, not just "existing in the German Wikipedia". Bearcat (talk) 16:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see her citation count and h-index at https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=r-iCYUkAAAAJ Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The citation counts linked above are not high enough to convince me of WP:PROF#C1, so I think something else is needed. The article lists several books, but most of those appear to be edited volumes. If we can find multiple published reviews each of more than one authored book, that could be enough to make the case for WP:AUTHOR notability instead. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft. I think this is a classic example of where the editor should be asked to improve the article so it meets notability requirements, which as mentioned by David Eppstein it might, and also they also need to ensure it is properly formatted and sourced. I think deletion is too harsh, I would have started first with tagging and marking a few places for improvement with a NPP message to the originators. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moving to draft will do nothing at all to change whether the subject is notable. And "so it meets notability requirements" exhibits a misunderstanding of what notability means. It is not articles that meet notability requirements, it is their subjects. If the subject is notable, she is notable regardless of the state of the article. If she is not, she is not. Since we're at AfD, we should decide the issue. Draftifying, after reaching AfD, has the appearance of being a cowardly way of saying "let's hope the author goes away so we can delete it in another 6 months without discussion". Draftifying can sometimes be useful in the situation where we have a clearly-notable subject and a clearly-unready article about them, but that's not the case here. It is not article improvement that we need – the article is in ok shape for what its sources provide – but a determination of whether the subject actually is notable or not. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree, we have very different views on this. As you stated, "If we can find multiple published reviews each of more than one authored book, that could be enough to make the case for WP:AUTHOR notability instead." I agree with you that the case is not made for notability as yet. To me WP:BURDEN matters, and I consider "notability" to be on a par with "verifiability". The wording for the originator after Draftification is exactly relevant here -- "please improve"

I view deleting as very harsh, it is unlikely that the page will ever be revised. I consider it a last resort; as I said above, I think that an AfD nomination should not have been done. Just because this is an AfD discusion does not mean that is all we can vote for, WP:Ignore all rules is relevant IHMO. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- one of the few Professorial doctors in a large department at one of the major German research universities. Her position is really akin to a named chair at a major US institution, which is a clear WP:PROF pass. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as "Chair of Sociology" (actually of Sociology V) at the University of Stuttgart. (See more detailed description here). For me, this satisfies academic notability.--Ipigott (talk) 08:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamini Aiyar[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

non-notable tag since 2012, most references are WP:PSTS or WP:SPS. May be in the news recently due to stepping down as CEO, but otherwise not notable. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 08:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Organizations, Delhi, and United Kingdom. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 08:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. She's the head of Centre for Policy Research; she seems to qualify under WP:NPROF.— Moriwen (talk) 16:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No longer the head. Plus WP:NPROF is for highly prestigious academic institutions. I can not see CPR meeting that in WP:RS. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 16:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That she is no longer the head doesn't subtract any notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NPROF is for highly prestigious academic institutions. I can not see CPR meeting that in WP:RS. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 15:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A Google News search whose timeframe ends before her recent resignation: [6]. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 14:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 15:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Plenty of refs for this. Desertarun (talk) 15:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions[edit]

Karl Mahlburg (via WP:PROD on 11 April 2024)
Madeleine Louise Lynch Dungy (via WP:PROD on 11 April 2024)
Daniele Pantano (via WP:PROD on 11 April 2024)
Abdullah Gohar (via WP:PROD on 8 April 2024)
Yehuda Tagar (via WP:PROD on 7 April 2024)
~~William Christian Hackett (via WP:PROD on 5 April 2024)~~ (AfD open)
~~Samuel Krislov (via WP:BLP-PROD on 4 April 2024)~~