Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Hicks

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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 11:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Hicks

Delete. Vanity page. No more notable than typical academic. Still A Student 16:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A handful of cites, but doesn't seem to have troubled google or google scholar excessively. Nor amazon books. Tentatively, highly reversible Delete pending more evidence. Regards, Ben Aveling 16:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Subject seems to meet notability requirements. Edgar181 23:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Still a Student. Professors tend to require publications and the like for notability. Stifle 01:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!
Angr/talk 21:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep. The subject is likely (almost certain) to become more notable as time goes on, rather than less. The specific topic of her visible work so far is significant, and I suspect (IANAPolSci) is going to grow in volume in the next decade, greatly and more than quite a few academic areas. The originator of the article has a spread of interests[1] although New College Florida is a key one and the article is not free-floating but tied into at least a list of like pol scientists. I doubt it is pure vanity. I'm entirely disinterested AFAIK, and a very long way away. Midgley 21:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Being "one of the world's leading experts on Eastern European environmental movements" seems a fair (if somewhat weak) claim to notability. Subject has a book published by Columbia University Press and a reasonable number of hits on Google Scholar. dbtfz ^talk 00:58, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; appears to meet, at least minimally, notability criteria both as published author and specialist academic. Not vanity article, original author has written several articles on various academics. Monicasdude 01:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per above. Mr. Pincus F. 06:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Monicasdude. JoshuaZ 07:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and Expand: Article needs cleanup. --Ragib 16:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Keep providing that the books by her referenced in the body of the article are cited properly and the article is cleaned up. OnceBitten 17:37, 13 March 2006 (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.