Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine McBride-Chang


 * 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 Nomination withdrawn - this looks like a clear keep based on WP:PROF #1. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 21:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Catherine McBride-Chang

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I don't see any obvious reason that the subject passes WP:PROF, and I am not sure that her publications yet meet WP:PROF criterion 1. I recently trimmed this article substantially, so editors may also wish to look at the old version. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 02:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Cnilep (talk) 03:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Cnilep (talk) 03:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. Would the nominator care to give his views on the subject's citation record on Google scholar? Xxanthippe (talk) 04:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC).
 * Well, I was hoping that other people could comment on that. I'm not an academic, and I have never had any personal involvement with the system of academic publishing and citation records, so I'm not the best judge of these things. I started a discussion at WikiProject Linguistics two days ago to try and get input on exactly this point, but it didn't receive any responses; I nominated the page for deletion partly in the hope that it would provide some clarity on PROF #1. If others are of the opinion that this is an obvious keep based on PROF #1, then I'll gladly withdraw the nomination. Best — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 14:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment—According to Web of Knowledge, Dr. McBride-Chang has an h-index of 14, based on 70 total publications archived, but h-index needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Psycholinguists do tend to be slightly better represented than other linguistic subfields in WoK. By way of comparison, Jean Aitchison has an h-index of 63, W. Tecumseh Fitch 21, and Lise Menn 8 according to WoK. Cnilep (talk) 04:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this very helpful information. According to my inspection of GS she has 11 papers with over 100 cites each and an h-index of 42, which would usually lead to a clear pass of WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:28, 1 November 2012 (UTC).


 * Keep: Dr. McBride-Chang is an associate editor of Developmental Psychology and has been published in peer-reviewed journals over 100 times. Both of her books have ISBNs and Library of Congress entries. Faustus37 (talk) 05:14, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * These are very respectable academic achievements, to be sure. Unfortunately, none of them are enough to pass WP:PROF if you inspect the wording closely. The comments above about citation indices seem more promising, however. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 09:57, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep on pass of WP:Prof on basis of citations in GS. A check of these and of WoK would be helpful. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC).
 * Keep. The citation counts in her Google scholar profile (12 publications with over 100 citations each and an h-index of 38 are more than high enough to show a clear pass of WP:PROF, as Xxanthippe says. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:58, 4 November 2012 (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.