Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Mays


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  23:08, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Elizabeth Mays

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Only refs are primary and has been tagged as non-notable for more than a decade - hopefully we can now get it resolved one way or the other. Boleyn (talk) 07:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:26, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:26, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:26, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 14:26, 26 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete – Fails GNG and WP:ACADEMIC. Don't get her confused with the Canadian Elizabeth May... Missvain (talk) 00:08, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Her main notability claim is not via general notability, but rather WP:ACADEMIC, as far as I can tell. Her textbooks are cited a couple of hundred times, but I wouldn't know if that's considered enough for her field. PK650 (talk) 03:18, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I get it, I'll update to say I also think she fails WP:ACADEMIC. Missvain (talk) 00:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I added a review of one of the books, and a reference to another. It's not much, and I do not think she passes WP:PROF. Drmies (talk) 00:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. I found and added one more book review. But I don't think one review of a co-authored book and one review of an edited volume is quite enough for WP:AUTHOR, and I also think that if we discount the citations to edited volumes her remaining citation record is not enough for WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:28, 29 January 2020 (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.