Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathy Dettwyler


 * 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 – PeaceNT 17:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Kathy Dettwyler

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Delete Does not show evidence of passing WP:PROF. I.E., importance of publications is not established. Will change vote for such evidence. TonyTheTiger 16:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Many solid citations in google scholar, some of which indicate broader notability. Should have been tagged with expand and cite before it was nominated for deletion, as simple improvements would likely satisfy the nominator's concerns.--Buridan 16:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Books, papers etc. Seems to pass WP:PROF per Buridan. The article needs to address the tags that have been added but AfD is not the answer. --Bduke 04:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:PROF, contrary to Buridan, her h-index is 10, modest for a full professor. Note that the essence of notability isn't that the subject writes things, but that things are written about them. Pete.Hurd 04:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I was not making the argument on the basis of wp:prof proposed guidelines, i was making it on general notability. --Buridan 15:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * According to http://www.brics.dk/~mis/hnumber.html her h-number is 6, and 3 for the "Medicine, Pharmacology, and Veterinary Science" category alone, when using "Katherine Dettwyler" as the search term. It is 10 when using "K. Dettwyler". I think there are issues with the h-number calculator... Ciotog 17:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I see my error... Ciotog 17:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * My H number is 6 too.... heh, I'm not sure it well applied across all disciplines.--Buridan 00:02, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Fails WP:PROF but is a notable figure in the Breastfeeding advocacy community --Infrangible 04:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm willing to change my opinion about notability if WP:RS to support her notability if that comes via breastfeeding advocacy, rather than being a professor. Pete.Hurd 04:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Well according to her CV she has been given awards and grants relating to her breast feeding work. --Quirex 21:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.  -- Pete.Hurd 02:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment According to her CV she has won the 1989 Fulbright Scholar Award for Research. That's pretty good. For more information about the notability of the Fulbright scholarships checkout wikipedia:Fulbright_Program (I'm aware inclusion in Wikipedia is not notability but the article, the subject and references speak for itself). According to WP:PROF a notable award is enough. According to WP:BIO she might need another award for inclusion but she has some less interesting ones. Fulbright is pretty notable. --Quirex 21:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * keep On the basis of any guidelines, 3 books, one of which won the AmerAnthA's Margaret Mead Award as well as the Fulbright. Multiple awards. Right there in the article.
 * And h index is not relevant unless comparing people within the exact same field. Anthropologists do not publish many dozens of articles. See article on h index before using--and no, I did not write that article.DGG 06:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC) (though I should mention that the 3 listed are each one in the top journal in their respective specialties.)DGG 06:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Her book "Dancing Skeletons: Life and Death in West Africa " is considered a textbook at many universities (/,, , etc), passing WP:PROF. John Vandenberg 07:53, 25 January 2007 (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.