Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Candace Young


 * 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   delete. Tim Song (talk) 03:34, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Candace Young

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Barely fails WP:PROF by my reading. delete UtherSRG (talk) 08:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I argue that she meets WP:PROF by having been President of the Missouri Political Science Association, being a Walker and Doris Allen Fellow, and having published works on assessment that have concretely influenced the policies of universities in entirely different parts of the country. Beyond being a professor, though, she has served in political positions as a member of numerous statewide panels that govern higher education in Missouri. Also, if you go to Google scholar and type in "Candy Young" instead of "Candace Young" you will see her actual works. In particular, her article on capstone experiences is widely cited and has been used as a model for capstones at universities across the nation. In fact, Truman State University was the first school in the nation to implement a broad and robust assessment program, and this assessment model is under Candy's direction and has influenced numerous other schools (unfortunately, my source for this information is a dissertation entitled "Strategic Responsiveness to Institutional Pressures" by Debra Cartwright, so it is not very accessible for verification). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamc714 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —Nsk92 (talk) 12:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:36, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. I haven't seen any evidence such as heavy citation of her publications that she is considered an important expert in academic assessment, and there is little or no nontrivial third-party sourcing about her in our article. The SUNY "celebration of teaching" thing that she is cited for in our article appears to be primarily an internal quality-building administrative exercise, not something we can hang notability on. So I'm not convinced from the evidence presented here or what I can dig up on my own that she passes any of the criteria of WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep President of Missouri PSA should surely count for something. And she apparently held government positions.Cptcrow (talk) 00:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Serving as president of Missouri PSA seems to satisfy criteria #6 of WP:PROF, and presenting a paper at the American Political Science Association's Teaching and Learning Conference satisfies criteria #1 that her work is considered to have made an impact. Harland  Q  Pitt  02:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete A Presidency needs to be of a major national or international organization to meet WP:Prof, not just a local state group. The government positions are limited to "statewide panels",which do not seem to be important, and notability based on them would require meeting the GNG, for which there is no evidence. She has only one paper in Scopus, and nobody has ever cited it. I can find only one relevant item in Google Scholar that has any citations at all: --and it has only 10 citations ever. Presenting a paper at a conference is not making an impact in the scholarly world--by that standard almost every graduate student would be notable; for bios of faculty here we don;t even include them in the article, let alone rely on them for notability. I'm not sure there's even a credible claim to notability here: pure promotionalism. [[User:DGG| DGG] ( talk ) 08:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:PROF. This individual appears to be heading down the road of notability, but hasn't quite gotten there yet.    talk 22:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, insufficiently notable. Hairhorn (talk) 18:47, 6 June 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.