Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irene Sue Vernon


 * 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 no consensus. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:32, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Irene Sue Vernon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails PROF (and GNG). Majority of refs on the article are primary, and the only things I can find on Google (using a variety of search terms) is variations on "said Vernon" or other one-sentence mentions. Primefac (talk) 01:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep as primary sources is only how we can specific and. exact information from this field and area, and WorldCat shows a major holding for one book published by UniversityNebraska, this would be enough. SwisterTwister   talk  19:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Where does "has written a book" appear in WP:PROF? Primefac (talk) 00:36, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not to contain original research, if an article is based on primary sources it needs to be scrapped.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. A GS h-index of 8 (for I S Vernon) may just meet WP:Prof in this low cited field. Also some WP:GNG. Xxanthippe (talk).

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:48, 17 December 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  20:07, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Very little sign of notability. Not enough for its own article space. Scorpion293 (talk) 20:43, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep -- her book is widely held in the US & internationally (1364 libraries according to Worldcat); chair of her department; fine for a low-cited field, per User:Xxanthippe. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 03:36, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not all that persuaded by library holdings. A book can sit on the selves for decades without being taken out. Usage would be more useful, but is not available. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:34, 29 December 2016 (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.