Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oscar Ybarra


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Oscar Ybarra

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to fail WP:SCHOLAR, google search fails to return any notable results. Cubbie15fan (talk) 21:27, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. His Google Scholar profile shows enough citations for a clear pass of WP:PROF. He is a Fellow of the American Psychological Society and of the Society of Experimental Social Psychology, which may also be enough for #C3 depending on how selective they are. And Google News shows quite a few hits for his name and apparently relating to his research. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as subject clearly passes the first criterion of WP:NACADEMIC. The editing history of the article is certainly suspect on COI grounds, and the article definitely could be more encyclopedic, but for a notable subject these are reasons for improvement, not deletion. Bakazaka (talk) 04:38, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep meets notability requirements, but should be cleaned up --DannyS712 (talk) 10:24, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Article sourcing is weak, but I think the large number of citations for his work makes a convincing argument for keeping the article. Papaursa (talk) 20:49, 23 December 2018 (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.