Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victoria Chick


 * 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The result was   keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 14:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Victoria Chick

 * – ( View AfD View log )

only reference is a "dictionary" of economists aprock (talk) 05:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 05:30, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * keep&mdash;for goodness' sake, h-index of 21 per gscholar, wrote a book with close to 500 citations. meets WP:PROF with ease.  perhaps nom would consider withdrawing the whole pile of these to save everyone some time? &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 06:18, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep The nomination does not provide a reason to delete as the source provided is a biographical dictionary and so is an excellent one for this purpose. More sources are readily available such as Essays in Honour of Victoria Chick which includes a history of her academic life. Warden (talk) 06:25, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * withdraw I'm happy to withdraw this. aprock (talk) 07:00, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep on GS cites alone. Xxanthippe (talk) 08:26, 3 October 2011 (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.