Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane P. Perry


 * 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. JForget 23:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Jane P. Perry

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

She is a preschool educator but not notable. There are no outside sources. BillNote (talk) 22:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Doesn't pass WP:NOTABILITY. Billbowery (talk) 23:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment "Preschool educator" seems a highly inaccurate summary; she's a research coordinator at the Harold E. Jones Child Study Center at UC Berkeley. She's apparently been published in some capacity. I think she may qualify under WP:ACADEMIC or WP:N, although I'm probably not going to do the legwork myself to establish such. Also, note that Jane p. perry redirects to the article for the Child Study Center, although there's no actual mention of Perry at that article except in a footnote. Maybe a merge is appropriate. Or maybe she's not actually notable at all; I'm just sayin'. Propaniac (talk) 23:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete As the research coordinator, the notability is to be judged as a researcher according to WP:PROF. Her one significant book, Outdoor play  is by a leading academic publisher and is in over 500 WorldCat libraries, but has been cited less than a dozen times--ditto for her journal articles.  Not   notable. DGG (talk) 03:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —John Z (talk) 05:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete on basis of DGG's findings. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete. The fact that subject has a PhD and works at a university, along with the observation that most of the article is a somewhat prolix discussion of her research work, certainly qualifies application of WP:PROF. However, long biblio actually only references a few works, especially the Outdoor Play book, which DGGs analysis indicates has not been influential. Neither is there any other obvious basis for a claim of notability. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 18:55, 11 August 2009 (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.