Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheena Greitens


 * 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. Michig (talk) 08:11, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Sheena Greitens

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non notable assistant professor. Does not meet WP:Prof: no published books, a few articles, none cited more than 19 times. This is more or less typical fora an Assistant Professor, which is why very few people at that beginner's rank have ever been held notable by WP:PROF. See adjacent afds to understand why this article was written  DGG ( talk ) 01:51, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 02:10, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete agree with DGG. I did turn up her wedding announcement in the NY Times, which shows her maiden name as Sheena Chestnut. Does she look any better notability-wise in that light,  DGG? Google book results here for Sheena Chestnut.New Media Theorist (talk) 02:59, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment as Sheena Chestnut, "Illicit activity and proliferation: North Korean smuggling networks" cited 66 times according to Scholar. "Sopranos State? North Korean Involvement in Criminal Activity and Implications for International Security" 19 citations on Scholar. --Samuel J. Howard (talk) 03:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - she just doesn't stand on her own. She might one day, but not at present. Rklawton (talk) 03:55, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to Eric Greitens as I see no likely improvement here. SwisterTwister   talk  07:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I created this page after watching Eric Greitens' livestream announcement to run for governor yesterday which led me to Google "sheena greitens wiki" which came up empty despite there being significant resources about her online which I compiled for the interest of future readers. I thought their wedding's publication in the NyTimes (some indicator that they must be of some interest to society at large) plus her work on North Korea - which is widely cited due to the use of highly guarded and unique data she had access to regarding the country, largely gained through the State Department - was cause for notability. --Chad.huber (talk) 08:51, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete This is clearly created to enhance Greiten's image and profile for the campaign. She is not a distinguished academic or public figure by any measure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.74.51 (talk) 22:56, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment It doesn't matter why the article was created in regards to the question of whether she's notable or not. I think that mentioning that in the nominator's reasons is irrelevant and shouldn't bear on the discussion. Now that I've said that, my vote, however would be:
 * Merge or Userfy due to the fact that 1) she will most likely publish more work and 2) her husband may be a governor in the future. No reason to tear down someone else's work and and then have to rebuild later. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:24, 3 October 2015 (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.