Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard A. Houghten


 * 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The result was   keep (nomination withdrawn). —David Eppstein (talk) 02:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Richard A. Houghten

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

Reads like a CV, not an encyclopedia article. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:52, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn As per request from one of the fine editors in this discussion who is in the midst of rewriting the article, I am withdrawing my nomination. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am posting this from an airport, where I am waiting to board a flight, so I don't have time to do a detailed search for the moment. But a superficial GoogleScholar search produces impressive citation results for this name:: 512, 260, 188, 208, 156, 129, etc. So he might in fact be notable, although the article clearly needs to be re-written. Nsk92 (talk) 22:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Poor Nsk92, traveling in Europe... :-) Web of Science lists 356 articles for "Houghten RA", which have been cited 16977 times, giving him an h index of 63. The article is horrible and should be rewritten. AfD is not for that. Please tell me why this person is not notable and why this article should be deleted????? --Crusio (talk) 23:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Regarding WP:PEOPLE: "Avoid criteria based on search engine statistics (e.g., Google hits or Alexa ranking)." Also, the article has major WP:COI issues (compare the surname of its author to the surname of the subject). However, if anyone would like to volunteer to rewrite it, I will promptly remove the nomination. Merci beaucoup. Ecoleetage (talk) 00:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure web of science and google scholar citation numbers and the eventual citation weight are acceptable hints that notability exists under WP:PROF. I suspect that the search for "Houghten RA" is coming up with more than one person (356 articles!), but if he has written half that many he meets WP:PROF. Protonk (talk) 01:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep Extremely notable. Professional researchers are notable by their research, and the notability is certified by their peers and expressed through appointments to distinguished positions, and by citations to their articles. It just needs a few paragraph breaks and a list of the most cited articles.  "Reads like a [whatever] " is never a reason for deletion, though it is for rewriting.  I think I'll add that to WP NOT.DGG (talk) 01:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy-keep I'm re-writing it. He's super notable. Protonk (talk) 02:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Done Deal If you are rewriting, I am withdrawing the nomination. And when it is rewritten, Protonk, please nominate it in WP:DYK.  Good job! Ecoleetage (talk) 02:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * WIll do, hoping I can find some good sources beyond difficult and dense biology papers. :) Protonk (talk) 02:21, 30 June 2008 (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.