Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew John Schofield


 * 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The result was Speedy keep (WP:WITHDRAWN; see comments below). (non-admin closure) -- Pingumeister(talk) 16:26, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Andrew John Schofield

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lack of secondary sources to confirm sufficient notability; some primary sources may not be reliable enough to back up claims in the article. -- Pingumeister(talk) 12:39, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 13:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. According to the article he unambiguously meets WP:PROF #C2 (Maxwell Prize), #C3 (Fellowship of the Institute of Physics) and #C5 (Pro-Vice-Chancellor). Citation record and a Scopus h-index of 23 also suggests he'd meet #C1. We can assume an academic of Schofield's stature is notable for their work even if they aren't frequently mentioned in secondary sources. Joe Roe (talk) 14:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay - I was unaware of WP:PROF. -- Pingumeister(talk) 15:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * If there's one thing I've learned about Wikipedia it's that there's always a policy you don't know about! Maybe consider withdrawing this nomination, in the interests of expediency? Joe Roe (talk) 16:06, 20 September 2016 (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.