Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bunny Cowan Clark


 * 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The result was nomination withdrawn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skipple (talk • contribs) 17:49, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Bunny Cowan Clark

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Sources nor article demonstrate notability. WP:BEFORE returns little. Fails WP:NBIO.  Skipple  ☎  17:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators,  and Women.  Skipple   ☎  17:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: May pass WP:NPROF as a fellow of the American Physical Society. Curbon7 (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Regardless of the status of APS fellowship, she is also a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which is #3 conferring, so keep. Curbon7 (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, an APS fellowship IS sufficient to confer notability per WP:NPROF, and there are literally hundreds of physicist articles included in WP on that basis. PianoDan (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this information, I wasn't aware of this when I made the nomination.  Skipple  ☎  17:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi . Given that info, and the sources since found, would you consider withdrawing the nomination so it can be speedily closed? If you're not already familiar, you can find the procedure at WP:WITHDRAWN. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep if the infobox claim that she was a distinguished professor (NPROF C5) is verified. JoelleJay (talk) 18:16, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Verified. JoelleJay (talk) 18:20, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: here's another source with significant coverage: Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * She's also given lengthy treatment in Mostly quoted material, but the parts in the author's voice are enough to meet sigcov. I'm definitely a Keep on this per WP:NBASIC, with the sources mentioned in this discussion being enough to demonstrate the pass. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:BASIC and WP:NPROF. In addition to the sources above and in the article, she has an entry in this reference work: 4meter4 (talk) 19:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as notable under WP:BASIC and WP:NPROF per the evidence shared above. Topshelver (talk) 02:58, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Kansas,  and Michigan. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 10:05, 9 November 2022 (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.