Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Comstock


 * 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. I performed a further search on sources to see if there was any further information on the subject, but was  unable to find the kind of stuff to show she passes the GAC. Given that she doesn't pass WP:PROF either, and several strong arguments by delete !voters, what needs to be done seems clear. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Jamie Comstock
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Subject of article, an academic, fails to meet the criteria set out in Notability (academics). It further fails to meet the general notability guidelines of WP:GNG. Geoff Who, me?  00:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: Subject was the provost - the chief academic officer - at a medium-sized university. There was also some controversy under her tenure that attracted national attention. She meets the general notability standards. ElKevbo (talk) 02:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Provost is not the chief academic officer: President is. A few well cited papers but with a GS h-index of only 10 in a high cited field does not pass WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC).
 * The president is the chief executive officer with oversight over the entire university. The provost is the chief academic officer with responsibility for the curriculum and faculty affairs.  Our article about the position describes this. ElKevbo (talk) 13:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Exactly, so a provost is not the head honcho as required by WP:PROF. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 14:09, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes but the general notability guidelines trump WP:PROF. ElKevbo (talk) 04:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * They sure do, providing you can find any. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC).


 * Delete As Xxanthippe says: not the cief academic officer and does not meet any other criterion of WP:PROF. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. She holds the position of Chief Provost which may not be president, but it is a top postion. Also, she was interim president at least once and the Wiki article says twice. I think this interim position is certainly an honor because the institution is not going to choose someone unqualified for the position (unless they want management problems to develop). Then combine that with her original work which includes creating " the new College of Communication" (Butler's sixth college), "expanding international education", and a noteworthy role of support that makes education at Butler available to underpriveleged high school students. Furthermore, she has been "chief academic officer" at three institutions, and oversaw "the highest overall retention rates in Butler's history". Based on the above she is appears to be an above average academian. I will follow that with this blurb "She also promoted ... gender equity, curriculum reform, stronger student retention through engagement, and facilitation of international
 * student and faculty exchanges. . In addition, it appears that she has published in peer reviewed publications . Overall this is an above average individual (academian) who actively makes positive changes in her field either through action or through publishing. Steve Quinn (talk) 20:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Further comment Comstock was also centrally involved with this student blogger incident, and this incident recieved some news coverage., . So far the news coverage at Huffington and US News focuses on the Inside Higher ED article (which is a reference of this Wiki article). Also the US News article states that this "... incident garnered so much national attention from media outlets..." . - Steve Quinn (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Neutral observation. I am completely ignorant about notability guidelines, have never commented (as far as I can remember) on anything like this.  But Steve, I want to note that your point about her being published in peer-reviewed publications is completely moot; this is a minimum requirement just to become a tenured professor at most major universities.  And that blurb that she promoted ... gender equity, curriculum reform, stronger student retention through engagement, and facilitation of international student and faculty exchanges. is nothing more than what a PR department could and would produce for any of its administrators.  Having said all this, she may very well merit having her article preserved; I don't know enough about how those things are decided, I just wanted to comment on two items that really didn't amount to as much as they may have appeared. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:36, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Concur with Geoff, Xxanthippe and Guillaume.  Does not meet WP:PROF requirements. Also, references used to support accomplishments are internal sources. Richardpipe (talk) 13:34, 8 August 2012 (UTC) — Richardpipe (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

_____________________________________********Please contribute above this line******* ______________________________________________________________


 * Question Why is this marked "2nd nomination"? Where's the first AfD? --Guillaume2303 (talk) 14:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Because my connection crashed and disconnected me in the midst of the nom and I started over, only to find I needn't have. Mea maxima culpa. Geoff  Who, me?  16:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed. postdlf (talk) 19:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 00:41, 12 August 2012 (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.