Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Hill (scientist)


 * 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. I was not as thorough as I should have been before nominating this page. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 07:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Frank Hill (scientist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Astrophysicist whose main claim to fame is making a few comments about a slight irregularity in the sunspot cycle. Entirety of (non-primary) references deal with the solar cycle itself, with sound bites from Hill and no other coverage. Therefore, I must conclude that neither WP:PROF nor WP:GNG are met, and this is a case of BLP1E. Primefac (talk) 11:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 11:14, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 11:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Clearly passes WP:PROF. Just counting 4 of his papers I see he's been cited about 2000 times, having published papers in Science, among others. WP:BEFORE evidently hasn't been performed appropriately. Best, FoCuS contribs ;  talk to me!  18:36, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:PROF is a straightforward criterion, and he meets it. Having made a scientific discovery is not the sort of thing BLP1E applies to.  DGG ( talk ) 00:45, 21 August 2015 (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.