Talk:Eileen M. Crimmins

Untitled
I am currently working to input more information to expand the article on Eileen Crimmins.Gero228 19:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

OK. You should really not create the page until you have at least some content ready. Madlobster 23:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * that is good advice, because --rightly or wrongly--people do go around here deleting unsourced articles, even by speedy.
 * However I am not the author, and so I can and have removed the tag altogether, as it is clear that full professors at research universities are usually considered notable at AfD, and that therefore  speedy deletion of such articles is not appropriate--speedy is only for uncontroversial deletions.  DGG 21:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag again. ER Talk 01:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This unusual way to start a user page makes it clear that these statements all apply. ER Talk 02:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That was my personal stupid fault--I erroneously added the note to the user page instead of the talk page. I fixed it. -- I do not think any of the comments you cited apply. DGG 17:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I am not the author
and therefore can and did remove the speedy tag. ''anyone but the author can do so--please read the text of the speedy template, and if you still don't think so, look at the most recent current discussions on the talk page for WP:CSD reiterating that this is and always has been the policy. The proper step if anyone want to delete it is now to send it to AfD but first please consider: 1. Full professors and holders of names chairs in major universities have consistently been found notable at AfD, because the position is not attained without many good publications and several successive peer-reviews of the work as a whole, conducted more stringently than WP could--the profession establishes the N by the standards of its own profession, and we just report that. 2. Speedy is for incontestable deletions--and if someone is contesting it in good faith, then speedy does not apply. 3. Stubs are permitted.

I have already removed the tag once, giving a brief explanation-- Since it seems difficult to convince the deletor of the appropriate use of speedy, I will send the article to AfD myself to get the opinion of the community. DGG 17:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello DGG, I notice that you have checked where else I've been editing, not that I mind (the contribution was welcome). Having read the rules, I must say that the 'speedy' tag should have been left until an administrator decided to remove it or to delete the article. The article did and does fulfil the criteria. It is a little irritating that two ostensibly disinterested contributors decided to remove it without doing anything about the article's many shortcomings. I disagree with your first point, science bureaucrats become just that through trivial publications etc. and as I'm sure you know most universities today run special easy option courses especially for bureaucrat students and profit. Point two is also not in the guidelines. I don't believe that 'the community' exists as such. ER Talk 10:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The question of whether she is actually notable can be raised at AfD--if the article so much as asserts it it any credible way, it is not a candidate for speedy. And anyone can remove the tag. Please read the rules at WP:CSD.DGG 20:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, just because I can write an encyclopedia article on a topic I know nothing about...
doesn't mean that this article couldn't use the advice and hand of a trained Gerontologist in improving it. Please find anything that I totally misunderstood or missed. Thanks. --Myke Cuthbert 03:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)