Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/APA Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Applied Research


 * 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 21:14, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

APA Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Applied Research

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability of this award is not clear. References provided in the article are either primary or questioning the recipients of the award. Lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources. Also a lot of red links for the recipients of the award itself. RadioFan (talk) 18:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is one of the major awards of a major academic society, and the level of sourcing that can be found (while not great) looks to me very typical for this type of award. See for instance this newspaper story about one of the recipients, this obituary of an academic in which his award is the first thing mentioned in a section about his international recognition, this mention of the award in a biography of one of its recipients, and this mention of the award as evidence of the broad acceptance of a psychological theory. None of these gives particularly in-depth coverage of the award itself (although they could be used in the article as sources for the facts that the people mentioned in them won the award) but I think they attest to its significance. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - the nominator is right, the article has a bunch of red links. Taking a quick look, though, it would seem there is a good number of them who might be notable and deserving or articles. American Psychologist called Manfred J. Meier (a red link in the subject article), "one of the most influential figures in the establishment of clinical neuropsychology as a specialty field." I just don't know that we have a lot of editors writing about notable clinical psychologists. Bruce E. Wampold (also a red link) acts as an in-house expert on psychotherapy for the American Psychological Association (those who give out the subject award) but has also written a bunch of well-cited books. Should also probably be a blue link. On the award itself, there is some coverage like this, but a lot of it is in American Psychologist (of course), the official journal of the APA. I suppose that's problematic in terms of independence. I think if the article was a big list of blue links, this probably wouldn't have been nominated. My suggestion is that many of them should be. Stalwart 111  00:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep As just explained, the red links are an indication of our failure in coverage, not the lack of importance of the award. They;ll be a good guide in what articles are needed. Obviously, anyone can give a award to other people who have already been given multiple important awards without that award being itself notable, and professional societies do give minor awards as well as major ones, and notable people do get minor awards in early parts of their career,  but David E gives just the right demonstration of the importance of this particular award in a person's career,  DGG ( talk ) 06:36, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - this article like others Onsager Medal, is essentially a detailed WP:FORK of the American Psychological Association. Details of the award and the list of awardees could be included in the APA article, but would bias the APA article in an awkward way.  Furthermore, this award, as a lifetime award (some other awards are "only" early career, in which case the recipients are on their way to notability but haven't got their yet - and of course, some don't make it, but this is a lifetime award).  As a lifetime award, this confers WP:PROF, to its recipients, and so the redlinks shouldn't be red.  As it is, the article is a short description - essentially a WP:LEAD, with instead of the main content is a list of recipients.  It thus  is a hybrid between a list and an article, with a tendency towards the former.  It meets the criteria at WP:NLIST.  This is how to stub biographies quickly - start with a list.  There are plenty of other such articles on Wikipedia.  I thank user:RadioFan for nominating it though, as these things need to be discussed periodically. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:54, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep, Important award by significant body. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:46, 10 June 2013 (UTC).
 * 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.