Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Plater-Zyberk (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Henry Plater-Zyberk

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * I think this page fails BLP notability guidelines. He is a lecturer. I do not see RS about him. He has a number of publications and citations, but they hardly qualify him as someone notable. Here is previous AfD. My very best wishes (talk) 23:42, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Citation record too low for WP:PROF and there seems to be nothing else. Note however that "senior lecturer" is a British academic job title more or less corresponding to "associate professor" in the US; unlike lecturers in the US, having this job title should not create a presumption of non-notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Citations on GS give h-index of 5. Not enough for WP:Prof. Nothing else. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC).
 * I agree, but just out of curiosity, which value of h-index would be sufficient? My very best wishes (talk) 00:01, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * That is a very significant question about which there has been vast debate in the archives of Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics). It depends on the subject. Judging by precedent, I would say that an index of at least 10 would be needed to be competitive here, i.e. WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:11, 23 September 2017 (UTC).
 * After looking through this discussion, it seems the entire idea of using formal metrics is partly problematic. Yes, someone with low h-index is definitely not notable. However, even someone with a high h-index may not deserve a page if he is not significantly and in depth covered in secondary RS. My very best wishes (talk) 14:14, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * High h-index is always sufficient to pass PROF 1. Refereed publications qualify as RS, though primary, so they can be used to source minimal info to at least flesh-out a stub. However, low h-index does not necessarily imply non-notability, for obvious reasons. As Xxan said, this has been discussed for years here. Informal, though long-standing consensus seems to be that 10 to 15 is the borderline range, though in some high-citation fields, like most branches of the biomedical sciences, 20 or 25 might be more like the minimum. Anything below 10 is usually taken as TOOSOON when there are no other independent notability contributors. Agricola44 (talk) 15:37, 25 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete does not meet the notability criteria for academics.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not seem to pass any PROF criteria. Agricola44 (talk) 15:37, 25 September 2017 (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.