Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Gosse


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 01:12, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

John Gosse

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Professor does not pass the WP:Professor test. His merits as seen in the page are not extraordinary in the sense he would be a major figure in geology or any science. Lappspira (talk) 17:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 August 26.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 18:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nova Scotia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Normally I would say that the Canada Research Chair is a pass of WP:PROF, but that criterion is really only intended to handle the case of chairs given to full professors. In this case he was given it at the same time that he was promoted from assistant professor to associate, and now (14 years later) he is strangely still stuck at the associate level. Nevertheless, I think his citation record is clearly good enough for WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Im starting to have dubts. The nomination was made with the information available in the article page. But now I see he has a "Canada Research Chair" and appears, by citations, to be an authority on a topic. Lappspira (talk) 09:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ☮ JAaron95  Talk  14:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per David Eppstein's arguments above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by New Media Theorist (talk • contribs) 17:29, 9 September 2015 (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.