Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sean Lawson (academic)


 * 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 delete. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 17:04, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Sean Lawson (academic)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable, secondary sources to meet WP:GNG, and with a low citation count (except for one publication - of which he was one of several authors), and an h-Index of 14, I don't think that they meet WP:NSCHOLAR.  Onel 5969  TT me 17:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 17:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Until I changed it the article said that the subject was a professor, rather than an associate professor as he is. I don't have time to look further at an article that starts with such a lie. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. One well-cited publication isn't enough to convince me of WP:PROF, and I don't see much else. The article as nominated also seems somewhat spun as a promotion for speaking gigs. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete He seems to have a good start but as an assistant prof with only a relatively few publications, he just isn't there yet. His books are held in >150 research libraries; however, I also happen to know that research libraries buy every publication from the publishers of his books (Routledge and MIT Press), so this doesn't mean that his were individually evaluated. I would say that he's doing his job, but that alone doesn't meet NSCHOLAR. Lamona (talk) 01:11, 4 February 2023 (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.