Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anita Rachlis


 * 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. Courcelles 00:53, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Anita Rachlis

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Non notable researcher/academic. XinJeisan (talk) 07:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as passing WP:Prof on the basis of GS cites. Nominator should have looked at them. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:53, 25 October 2010 (UTC).
 * I did spending time checking various locations. I saw the that Rachlis has several co-authored papers but I failed to see, from my perspective, any "independent reliable source." A large number of co-authored papers by themselves doesn't say to me "significant impact." But that is why there is a process, to discuss these issues. XinJeisan (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Web of Science lists >100 publications, total of >3000 citations, h-index of 24. --Crusio (talk) 15:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Xxanthippe's and Crusio's findings on citation stats are pretty clear on this one. Agricola44 (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2010 (UTC).
 * Keep per the above, and membership of a significant national body (now being added to article). hamiltonstone (talk) 22:02, 27 October 2010 (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.