Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillippa Jane Poole


 * 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. Very clear consensus that the subject meets WP:NPROF. Just Chilling (talk) 12:53, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Phillippa Jane Poole

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

does not seem to meet WP:PROF or WP:GNG.  DGG ( talk ) 08:58, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:35, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:35, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:35, 14 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment Being a Fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians may be enough to qualify under WP:PROF and being head of the University of Auckland's School of Medicine may be enough under WP:PROF, but neither seems very clear as far as notability is concerned (e.g. is the FRACP a highly exclusive fellowship? You do need training to get it ). IntoThinAir (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Regardless of the above considerations (which might separately be enough for notability) her 16 publications with over 100 citations each in Google Scholar gives her a pass of WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:57, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep? Passes WP:Prof if this link is correct. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC).
 * (1)Fellow RCAP is similar to the UK equivalents, it essentially corresponds to being boardcertified in the US, and is not a particular honour. The training you need to get in is the same sort of training that gives a specialty certification in the US and nothing more. It's not even analogous to the US medical Fellowship, which is a subspecialty training after the board certification and that too isn't notable--in the usual inflationary pattern, every physician in NYC has a board certification--even the ones in the walk-in clinics. I think in the the UK etc. this may not be the case, and people practice as a generalist without a specialty qualification, but that would still mean that  every specialist in the UK and similar countries would get an article--every neurologist, cardiologist, etc.
 * (2)Head of a department has never been accepted as notability. Normally all the senior people take it in turn. Dean of a medical scool is another matter, and we have generally considered  that this qualifies

"(3)The very high references in GoogleScholar arefrom being a Cochrane reviewer. (or joint author of a similar review published elsewhere). The only research papers have citations of 60 or 70 at best. We do need to decide whether to include an article for every one of the reviewer-authors for /Cochrane.  DGG ( talk ) 22:53, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment. Could you expand on the issue with Cochrane, which is new to me?


 * Keep. She's head of the School of Medicine, not just a Department, and past president of the Internal Medicine Society of Australia and New Zealand WP:Prof. I've also found some general coverage of her in reliable sources and added that. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 01:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. She is a full professor at New Zealand's top-ranked university, such rank being (according to Academic ranks (Australia and New Zealand)) equivalent to distinguished/endowed professor in most North American universities, thus passes WP:PROF. Having been president of the Internal Medicine Society of Australia and New Zealand may also put her past WP:PROF, depending on whether it is considered a major academic society. Being Head of School of Medicine would probably not be enough on its own, but adds to the other factors. FRACP is not significant. Nurg (talk) 10:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep; as creator. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep abundant evidence of passing NPROF whether their leadership, society inclusion, or being full professor at a major national university. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I think there's a decent case for WP:PROF and a good one for WP:PROF. In addition, I see no reason not to count Cochrane reviews towards her citation record. Writing an influential review, like being the author of a standard textbook, is a way of shaping one's field. (Secondarily, there is the factor that one might only get invited to write such a review if one is already fairly well-established, but I don't think we need to start splitting those hairs here.) XOR&#39;easter (talk) 02:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Seems to meet WP:NPROF as per Nurg and others. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:00, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - appears to meet WP:NPROF Bookscale (talk) 12:51, 21 July 2019 (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.