Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Adams: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:13, 19 April 2015

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. JodyB_talk 20:13, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Adams

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

Delete: non-notable author; only one published work; rest is theses and promos. Quis separabit? 21:12, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 01:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 01:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 01:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

keep User:Rms125a@hotmail.com seems to have missed the fact htat there are 2 published books, neither of them her thesis (which dealt with petroglyphs on Gabriola Island). Moreover Science (journal) published a profile on her and her career.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also it is redlinked to a number of Wikipedia articles, (because 2nd book was a series of biographies of notable archaeologists).E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In sum. What I have found is that Ladies of the Field gets cited, not only on Wikipedia, but also in, you know, real books. That both Ladies and Mermaids were reviewed in Booklist, and Publisher's Weekly, but, beyond that, only reviewed in minor outlets like archaeology blogs. That there is an occassional newspaper mention related to the books, and a few other mentions of her as a budding archaeologist, and that she is now a full-time mother. The only big deal article was the profile in Science, but Science is a pretty big deal. That, and the fact that the 2 books are real and are cited does, I think, push her into notability as an author. Albeit not by a wide margin.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - two well-reviewed books since her dissertation is enough for tenure nowadays, even in this tough market. Bearian (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:49, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources found/ –Davey2010^Talk 19:30, 19 April 2015 (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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.''
+<!--Template:Afd top
+Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
+The result was '''keep'''.  [[User:JodyB|'''JodyB''']]<sub>[[User talk:JodyB| <font color="red">talk</font>]]</sub> 20:13, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 ===[[Amanda Adams]]===
-{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}
 :{{la|Amanda Adams}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Adams|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 April 19#{{anchorencode:Amanda Adams}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amanda_Adams Stats]</span>)
@@ Line 15: / Line 22: @@
 <small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:Northamerica1000|North America]]<sup>[[User talk:Northamerica1000|<font size="-2">1000</font>]]</sup></span> 18:49, 19 April 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Amanda Adams]]</div>
 *'''Keep''' per sources found/ –[[User:Davey2010|<span style="color: blue;">'''Davey'''</span><span style="color: orange;">'''2010'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Davey2010|<span style="color: navy;">'''Talk'''</span>]]</sup> 19:30, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>