Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pieter Bevelander


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Pieter Bevelander

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can't find much about this professor that would serve to satisfy WP:NPROF, except that he seems reasonably highly cited. What I can't determine is whether these cite numbers (a dozen in the space between 50 and 100) add up to "significant impact on discipline" in Political Science/Sociology. I know that in plenty of disciplines they wouldn't. So, input please; will be happy to withdraw if this is considered a Big Gun. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:59, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * All right, consensus seems pretty clear that these cite numbers are sufficient. I'm going to withdraw. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:23, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:56, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:56, 6 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:Prof on basis of GS citations. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:45, 6 October 2019 (UTC).
 * Keep: worldcat identities page suggest that subject likely meets WP:AUTHOR. I'm willing to give this page the benefit of the doubt, as a later career academic and multiple books published by uni presses. --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:42, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Borderline. Citations for co-authored papers are in the range of 50-100, but there are quite a few. Several books. Leaning keep, through mostly because I think we need to be more inclusive for academics. If we were to look at our criteria strictly, pretty borderline. But if we were to compare academics to sportpeople, a senior academic like him is way up there in notability - since we are so inclusive in sports, if we were as inclusive in academia, we would probably have entries for grad students...--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:12, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a discussion for changing WP:NPROF rather than for its interpretation for this particular article. — MarkH21 (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately such discussions don't go anywhere, at least so far, so I think the other way, i.e. summarizing deletions outcome, might be better. Hence, my vote here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: Citation figures sound like this passes WP:NPROF. — MarkH21 (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep, per above. /Julle (talk) 01:59, 9 October 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.