Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johannes Hjellbrekke


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Johannes Hjellbrekke

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

can't see him meeting WP:PROF. very few gnews or gbooks hits. LibStar (talk) 05:53, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. He appears to not pass WP:PROF but I don't know whether this is an area that might be badly covered by Google scholar or not generally have many citations, explaining the low numbers. And as former editor-in-chief of an obscure 20-year-old journal, he might pass #C8 but I'd need to know more about how significant the journal is and how wide a pool of people the editor is chosen from to be convinced by that. So while there's still plenty of room to change my mind, I'm not yet convinced of a pass of any WP:PROF criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep GScholar and SSCI have an anglo-american bias, and do not include most of the journals that would cite an article on Norwegian economics. I think the journal he was editor of is a significant national journal in the field, and he's a full professor at a major university. Put together, that's enough.  DGG ( talk ) 05:53, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
 * almost all Scandinavian academics publish in English. This academic is also a visiting professor at a number of English language universities, you just can't says sources exist without showing them. LibStar (talk) 10:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:12, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree with  DGG ( talk ). I think there is enough notability to achieve an article. There seems to have a fairly large number of GHits on the Google Norway. scope_creep talk 17:04, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * could you please show actual examples of sources? LibStar (talk) 10:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - yes, he is a professor in sociology at the University of Bergen. I can't find any reliable sources that says he made significant impact in his scholarly discipline (and I'm Norwegian), except this that explain his study on social mobility in the upper middle class in Norway (the article uses the word "the elite"). This might be enough to pass WP:PROF, but I would except more coverage. As for C8, no:Sosiologisk tidsskrift is according the Norwegian wikipedia article "the most recognized sociological journals in Norwegian". I'm not familiar with the notability guidelines in this field to !vote, but I hope my comments are helpful to form a consensus. Mentoz86 (talk) 08:35, 18 September 2013 (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.