Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aurelie Thiele


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Thsmi002 (talk) 12:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Aurelie Thiele

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable person. --ElKabong888 (talk) 03:57, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Withdrawn by nominator. I didn't think about the academic importance of the article. --ElKabong888 (talk) 11:37, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 04:03, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 04:03, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

To be completely honest, I didn't think of the article in terms of academic importance. My mistake. At this point I would be inclined to keep the article.--ElKabong888 (talk) 09:01, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think her citation record (with 5 papers cited over 100 times each in Google Scholar) is enough for WP:PROF). As nominated, the article was sourced only to her cv; the sourcing is still not great (it now includes a database entry for her Ph.D., a published journal article with a paragraph about her blog, and a magazine profile from her former employer) but I think it's now at least not so bad as to make that a reason for deletion. (She also appears to be a self-published fiction writer but I haven't added any of that to the article because I could find no reliable sources for it.) For that matter, the bare-bones WP:JUSTNOTNOTABLE nomination fails to advance a clear reason for deletion, and fails to provide any evidence that the nominator has made any effort to understand or test for our criteria for academic notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:38, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * Keep per David Eppstein. You could at this stage withdraw the nomination, which would save time all round. See WP:WDAFD. Thanks.  Pam  D  10:38, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've done that now. --ElKabong888 (talk) 11:37, 29 January 2019 (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.