Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Gary Carr


 * 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. Shimeru (talk) 21:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Edward Gary Carr

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Article was created yesterday, it is one of several articles created by user:Leadersproject. Comes off as something of a CV, and is rather peacock flavored. Multiple issues here - they are listed in a template on the article page - boils down to little notability demonstrated with no reliable sources to back it up. Bringing here because assertion of notability voids a speedy, and it may be too controversial for WP:PROD.  Dennis The Tiger  (Rawr and stuff) 16:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly notable as head of an impt research unit with publication record to match: Scopus shows 54 papers,almost all with him as sole or principal author Highest citation 380, 152, 137, 108, which even a a field like experimental psychology indicates distinguished work. h=20 in Scopus, and will be probably twice hat in G Scholar. I suspect the present article as a copyvio, but the likely source might be ref . 1, which is a dead link. It could be rewritten in any case, which would take care of the peacockery--though there might be actually sources for them.  DGG ( talk ) 19:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Snow Keep. Just to add to  DGGs findings, WoS shows a large body of work (66 papers with a simple search on EG Carr) and a large citation count (appears to be around 1500), with an h-index of 23, which is way into the passing zone on WP:PROF #1. I see the concerns raised by  Dennis The Tiger  and some of the articles created by that user may have notability issues, but this particular case is not one of them – notability is entirely legit. Any problems can be handled by editing. Thanks all! Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 15:39, 9 April 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.