Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward S. Reed


 * 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 Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) --Xurizuri (talk) 08:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Edward S. Reed

 * – ( View AfD View log )

As far as I can figure out, doesn't meet any of WP:NACADEMIC or general biography notability. Xurizuri (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment He seems to be an authority in the field of Ecological Psychology the scientific study of perception-action from a non-functionalism approach. Looks like he wrote quite a few books and also see Worldcat. Oxford University lists one of his Ecological Psychology books and Yale University Press published one. With that said, I am not sure we can create out a biography together for an article. Lightburst (talk) 20:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:02, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:02, 28 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Heavy citations give an easy pass of WP:PROF, and the nine-page published academic obituary already listed as a reference and easily found online at or  should provide plenty of material for filling out an article. JSTOR also lists multiple reviews of his books, enough for WP:AUTHOR and for more depth about the contributions of his books. Bad nomination, no effort at WP:BEFORE demonstrated, WP:DINC. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes NPROF#1 based on citations. At least three books (Encountering the world: Toward an ecological psychology, From soul to mind, James J. Gibson and the psychology of perception) have several hundred citations each (the first, over a 1,000) as well as reviews which would be a pass of NAUTHOR.-- Eostrix  (&#x1F989; hoot hoot&#x1F989;) 07:51, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: oh fuck I think I nominated the wrong article. I'm so sorry to waste people's time, I had too many tabs open and I'm super bad with names. I'll be more careful in the future. --Xurizuri (talk) 08:22, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * you can follow instruction at WP:CLOSEAFD for Procedure for non-administrator close (nominator withdrawal).-- Eostrix  (&#x1F989; hoot hoot&#x1F989;) 06:42, 4 October 2021 (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.