Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary P. Koss


 * 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. WP:SNOW j⚛e deckertalk 15:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Mary P. Koss

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

New article that although likely a good faith article, it may have been intended to promote feminism. Though it tried to be neutral, it seems to have inappropriate external links. The article has few sources and sourced material, but its main claims to notability are not one of them. This article is definitely biased and I don't really think it meets Notability (academics). Mr. Guye (talk) 00:36, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:PROF. We deal with NPOV problems by editing. I see no particular promotional intent--it does need the removal of a few adjectives and some duplication (I did a start at this), and might need a check for copyvio also. But if it isn;t copyvio, I see no basis for bringing it here. I'll fix any faculty article for someone who clearly meets WP:PROF that's called to my attention and needs justy a quick routine adjustment to our style--just ask  me.  DGG ( talk ) 03:54, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:19, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Regent's Professor is "the highest of faculty ranks" at Arizona and clearly passes WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly exceeds the Average Professor Test WP:PROF and has had an impact on society outside of academics. The article can be improved through editing. Nickmalik (talk) 20:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep with a GS h-index of 70! What does the nominator think he is doing? Xxanthippe (talk) 22:38, 20 May 2014 (UTC).
 * Keep. It needs more sources, but this is a valid biography of a notable academic. The original article alternated between attacking and praising the subject in some bizarre attempt at NPOV, but it's starting to look better now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Snow keep. Misguided nomination. Please withdraw. --Randykitty (talk) 12:54, 21 May 2014 (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.