Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catriona Drew


 * 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. And here's a little something for the quality (or lack thereof) of the nomination statement. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Catriona Drew

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Is Drew notable enough? RDN1F (talk) 21:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - meet WP:PROF #1. Her work on self-determination and East Timor has been used by a number of researchers and academics.  nableezy  - 21:38, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per Nableezy. I'd also like to note that this article was nominated for deletion 3 minutes after being created (with references). I'm impressed at the nominator's ability to do a search of the numerous papers that cite Drew's work, thoroughly analyze them, decide that they weren't important enough, and finish the nomination within that time. --GRuban (talk) 22:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. No case for deletion is given, and none is evident from the article itself. Zerotalk 22:44, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. GS cites are 11, 7, 2, 2, 2. Totally inadequate for WP:prof. Is there anything else? Xxanthippe (talk) 22:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC).
 * Delete -- doesn't get close to WP:PROF: very low citations, virtually no news coverage, no significant positions. Her publishing record (as seen on her SOAS web page, here) is abysmal -- I'm surprised she still has a job.  The "keep" arguments above are lamentably unpersuasive.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to be a solid academic, but as yet no evidence of any impact. Does not meet WP:PROF. --Crusio (talk) 14:34, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete As I  see she doesn't not meet WP:PROF.Didn't found any significant news coverage of her also.--Shrike (talk) 12:28, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note Not a single one of the keep arguments actually talk about why the article should be kept, it just explains my original case for deletion's inadequacy, which is not an acceptable argument to keep an article RDN1F (talk) 20:51, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Pardon me, ONE of them does RDN1F (talk) 20:51, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:ACADEMIC. Her articles at Google Scholar have not been cited enough to demonstrate a significant impact on her field. Her position at the university is "lecturer" which doesn't sound like it conveys notability in its own right. --MelanieN (talk) 22:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI, "lecturer" in the UK is a regular academic position similar to "assistant professor" in the USA. Zerotalk 07:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's more or less what I thought. "Assistant professor" is not a generally notable position either. --MelanieN (talk) 14:31, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - I dont really mind if this article is deleted. Somebody made this name a red-link so I made an article on what I could find. If it goes back to not being a link that is a happy ending as far as I am concerned. But her work on East Timor has been cited by others. Not as much as papers in technical areas, but the number of citations is not low by humanities standards. Either way, Ive added what I can find, if somebody else want to keep looking then great, but Im not sure there is much more out there.  nableezy  - 15:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - her spare publication record might not get her fired, but it shows her lack of notability. Bearian (talk) 20:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:ACADEMIC. Perhaps notable in the future, but not yet.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:17, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as per foregoing deletion arguments. Seems more like a résumé. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 13:38, 8 September 2011 (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.