Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C. V. Savitri Gunatilleke


 * 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) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 15:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

C. V. Savitri Gunatilleke

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to show they meet WP:GNG, and they simply don't meet any of the requirements of WP:NSCHOLAR. The article claims they are a fellow of NAS, but this search did not turn up that fact. I tried several variants of spelling, but the google scholar search clearly has this spelling.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:25, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 15:27, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 15:27, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 15:28, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 15:28, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - wouldn't her election as Honorary Fellow of the top scholarly association in her field satisfy C#3 of WP:PROF?
 * Comment - I don't think so. That's not a notable organization. Onel 5969  TT me 16:45, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It is a notable org - it's the top scholarly society in her field. Guettarda (talk) 17:40, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I disagree. But that's neither here no there, what I should have said, is that in terms of the 3rd criteria of WP:NSCHOLAR, this does not appear to meet that notability criteria. Onel 5969  TT me 18:55, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - I found this Google Scholar profile which indicates an H-index of 35, but I don't know how well it is curated (husband also publishes) or how the order of authors comes into play. She won UNESCO's Sultan Qaboos Prize for Environmental Preservation with members of her department rather than individually, and I am not sure how notable that is. Here her colleague says she was a member of the National Academy of Sciences of Sri Lanka; their website is down right now (I also searched the US NAS site and there are no foreign associates in Sri Lanka under any name). I notice that the ATCB does not even have a WP entry, and I wonder if that is because it's not a notable organization. Larry Hockett (Talk) 16:24, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The fact that she and her husband both seem to publish together does complicate things like her h-index, but the fact that the ATBC picked her as their Honorary Fellow is noteworthy. As for the society itself - speaking as someone with a PhD in tropical ecology, it's clear to me that it is the premier professional society for tropical ecology. That's a difficult thing to document because people don't write a whole lot about professional societies, but see this, for example, where they are described as the world’s largest organization devoted to the study and conservation of tropical systems. Guettarda (talk) 16:53, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Lots of people have frequent co-authors. Why is it a complication that she's married to hers? —David Eppstein (talk) 20:46, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Ten publications with over 100 citations each (on Google Scholar, searching for author:CVS-Gunatilleke) is enough to convince me of a pass of WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:47, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep She clearly meets WP:NACADEMIC #2 and #3, with the Honorary Fellow award from the ATBC and as a member of the National Academy of Sciences of Sri Lanka (the external link to the American NAS is clearly wrong). She appears to meet #1 as well. She only needs to meet one of these criteria to be notable according to WP:NACADEMIC, and she meets 2 or 3. I don't know why she was nominated for AfD. RebeccaGreen (talk) 00:41, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:PROF as argued in the !votes above. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:26, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems like a solid keep based on her contributions to the field and reception of her work and research. Passes by way of WP:NACADEMIC #2, WP:NACADEMIC #3. WP:PROF. May be worth investigating variations of her name. Netherzone (talk) 16:10, 1 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.