Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Farrelly


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Mkdw talk 20:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Frank Farrelly

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Neutral proposal. Article is a mess, notable?, etc. This AfD may be the easiest way to fix or decide to delete. Canoe1967 (talk) 16:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - tone is overtly promotional and I cannot see that this individual has received significant, third-party coverage. Ergo, not notable. GiantSnowman 16:11, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Snowman, but did you not see this or something like it? Drmies (talk) 18:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Provocative Therapy is potentially notable - I do not believe Farrelly is. GiantSnowman 18:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - article has been vastly improved, notability now established. GiantSnowman 09:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:BIO. ukexpat (talk) 17:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Changing !vote to Keep.--ukexpat (talk) 17:10, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Obviously notable despite the state of the article. Come on y'all. Drmies (talk) 18:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * How is it "obviously" notable. GiantSnowman 18:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Eh, his book is cited in at least four academic books. It's in the article now, Snowman. Drmies (talk) 18:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * So the book is notable...? GiantSnowman 19:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Notability_(academics), item 1. Drmies (talk) 20:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:AUTHOR...? GiantSnowman 20:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Both Farrelly and provocative therapy are mentioned in numerous books on psychology, per the Google book search at the above link. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 01:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  Lady  of  Shalott  01:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions.  Lady  of  Shalott  01:11, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  Lady  of  Shalott  01:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep — It's just a mess. Normal editing can do the job. "Provocative Therapy" (+2 coauthors, 179 cites), "Code of Chronicity" (+1 coauthor, 56 cites), "Weapons of Insanity" (+1 same coauthor, 31 cites), "Provokative Therapie" (German edition) (+1 same coauthor, 110 cites). Plus trivial smatter. JFHJr (㊟) 02:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I saw this reported at WP:BLP/N and I feared another mess but Farrelly seems to meet WP:GNG at the very least, and so does his work. Not sure as an academic though. § FreeRangeFrog croak 17:15, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Close. I nominated as neutral and the only delete votes have been struck.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:46, 23 February 2013 (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.