Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julia G. Krivoruchko


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 00:31, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Julia G. Krivoruchko

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Quite not notable scholar Arthistorian1977 (talk) 22:10, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

notable like Nicholas de Lange in the field of Judaeo-Greek studies. Informationskampagne (talk) 22:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * This claim is nonsense. de Lange has far higher cites. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:35, 9 November 2016 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 22:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 22:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete scholar who fails WP:GNG —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 22:35, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. GS citations are feeble. Far WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:18, 8 November 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete as by far nothing at all convincing for WP:AUTHOR and WP:PROF, clearly too soon in her career. SwisterTwister   talk  23:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SCHOLAR. Yoninah (talk) 00:57, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete While the preliminary aspects that might lead to WP:PROF / WP:AUTHOR are present, it appears that the subject is just too soon to meet notability standards. I would have no objection to userifying the article until the day when it's ready for prime time. Alansohn (talk) 18:05, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not satisfy WP:SCHOLAR. -- M h hossein   talk 10:11, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I can understand now your objections, although I do not appreciate words like "nonsense" (wiki surely looses (potential) users, because of such word selection and behavior, or because of complexification of things that are not so complicated), but I still would like to emphasize the aspect of a neglected field, that has not a lot of researchers to talk about them; here we have now a researcher, with a lot o publications on this topic. Informationskampagne (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - the Onasis Foundation award is significant. Bearian (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The award is just a scholarship, which does not contribute to notability in WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:36, 15 November 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.