Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linda Skitka


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 18:59, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Linda Skitka

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

Professor of psychology who doesn't meet notability requirements for professors. ~ Eliz 81 (C)  22:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 19:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The above link to Google Scholar list many publications, two of them with more than 100 citations. Meets WP:ACADEMIC #1. --Crusio (talk) 00:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Good cites. GS h index = 21. It is a puzzle why this article was prodded. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete I do not see anything spectacular or notable about this professor. It seems like generic professor information.  I see no mention of national awards as a leader in her field.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep. Although true that there are no obvious awards claimed, she very specifically satisfies WP:PROF #1 – her research record is quite notable. WoS shows 42 hits with citations of 168, 62, 56, etc., indicating her work has had a clear and appreciable impact on a mainstream academic field. Agree with above – unclear as to why this appeared here in AfD. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC).
 * Comment. In addition to clearly passing WP:ACADEMIC #1, service as president of the International Society for Justice Research conveys notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC).


 * Delete Keep I don't believe simply authoring a lot of papers is sufficient to meet WP:PROF #1; the criteria states that "The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." Are there any such reliable sources that demonstrate not simply that she wrote a lot, but that her writings have "made significant impact in her scholarly discipline?" I saw a user above mention something to this effect regarding WoS; I don't recognize that term offhand. Could you expound please?


 * Regarding her presidency of the ISJR, as per criteria #6: "The person has held a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post at an academic institution or major academic society." What I've found so far on the ISJI has failed to show that they qualify as a "major academic society." Their website counter shows just over 13,000 hits, and the sole reference on the Wiki page for the organization is to it's own website. I also have some question if a self-authored resume really qualifies as fulfilling WP:BLP, but I suppose it's not a major point. Can someone show either a source demonstrating the "major academic society" status of the ISJR, or else the "significant impact" her research has had?  - Qi na el  &lambda;&alpha;&lambda;&epsilon;&omega; 01:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. Explanation of WP:Prof #1 follows: Publishing papers is not sufficient to achieve notability for academics and scientists. What counts is the impact they make on the scholarly community. In the area of academic and scientific research impact can be measured objectively by counting the citations to papers made by other independent sources. These citations are available from several places for example Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus and others List of academic databases and search engines. Statistical measures, such as the h index are applied to these findings. All these matters have been discussed extensively in the past and present academic AfD pages and User:Qinael should read these as well as the subjects cited. Standards for notability are higher for scholars than in many other areas of Wikipedia. Hundreds of sources are needed for an academic or scientist whereas some articles in WP have less than half a dozen. As a rule of thumb an h index of between 10 and 15 is often considered borderline; outside those limits no contest. An h index of 21 is pretty good by the standards applied in these AfD pages. For this subject it means that at least h squared (= 441) other authors have cited the subject's work. The Presidency of ISJR may not by itself be sufficient in itself to achieve notability but adds to it. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC).
 * Thanks; changed opinion above as per previous poster's comment and subsequent searching. Professor does appear to meet WP:PROF #1 standards.  - Qi na el  &lambda;&alpha;&lambda;&epsilon;&omega; &#124; δίδωμι 16:30, 23 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.