Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne P. Armstrong


 * 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. Drmies (talk) 21:06, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Wayne P. Armstrong

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I almost certain that there is a copyright violation in here, article was heavily edited last year by an editor of the same name as this article, I can't find anything that would suggest notability though. Fails WP:BIO and WP:PROF  Jay  Jay What did I do? 01:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep, and deal with the situation that exists, differently. Note the main thing for Wikipedia is that there is a professor, now retired, with tons of great photos of plants and tons of knowledge, and past experience putting stuff online into his own freely-available online compendiums, and there is some interest and willingness to contribute to Wikipedia.  can Wikipedia editors screw this up, yes they can, I am sure.  How about try to cooperate and bring along this person and/or whoever has been posting some material about him or for him?


 * About whether the article subject meets wp:PROF, it seems he has more than 200 publications (I see within the biography article about him at his website), and I rather think he probably does meet wp:PROF. About behavior, looking at the article, it was a two sentence stub from January 2010 to January 2014 (at this version), and then an editor using Wayne Armstrong name developed it somewhat.  Put their shoes on:  a poor article lasts for a long time, they step in and develop a bit, finally.  There are several inline references added, which seem somewhat relevant.  Maybe this was done by a student worker or a student or a fan of the professor.  The editor copy-pasted in what is apparently text from a San Diego newspaper article.  It is not plagiarism, because it is clearly attributed, but it is probably copyvio, yes, so the article should merely be cited and some short quote given.


 * So, let's edit that down, and maybe give some instructions at the contributor Talk page. And Keep the article for now, and ask for some photos to be contributed, and try to develop this situation better, instead of worse, for Wikipedia. :)  -- do  ncr  am  01:37, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


 * From a national newspapers literature search, trying "Wayne Armstrong wolffia" and "Wayne Armstrong Palomar":
 * "Weird Plants", by Pamela D. Jacobsen, The Christian Science Monitor, 18 April 2000, page 18. 1546 word article about wolffia and other weird plants starting off with discussion by Armstrong as expert.  Only one other expert cited, very close to end.
 * "CUTTINGS; The Castor Bean Plant: So Striking, So Poisonous", by Anne Raver, New York Times, 11 Sep 1994, page A.62. Sort of an odd article, giving tribute to armstrong;  the author tried but failed to reach him.  The "sumamry" of the article is this:  (begin summary quote) Castor beans "are unquestionably among the most deadly seeds on earth, and it is their irresistible appearance that makes them so dangerous," Mr. Armstrong wrote in a 1982 article in Environment Southwest magazine, which I'd unearthed at the library of the New York Botanical Garden.  /  The castor bean file there disclosed other tidbits: Agatha Christie used the poison in her 1929 mystery, "The House of Lurking Death," in which an heir and an heiress die from ricin mixed into fig paste. And in 1979, there was a true case of a poisoning in London, in which a Bulgarian diplomat was pricked by the tip of an umbrella containing ricin and died. / "Walking among large castor shrubs on a hot summer day can be quite an experience," Mr. Armstrong wrote, "with exploding carpels and seeds flying through the air and bouncing off road signs, sidewalks and one's head." (end quote summary)
 * I don't think the Wikipedia writing is by him.
 * From some journal lit searching on him as author, I see works by him in an "environmental" database, in a biology database, and numerous works in art abstracts database (multiple articles in a magazine called Ornament, and other journals/magazines). For example: Armstrong, Wayne P., Sea Frontiers. May/Jun94, Vol. 40 Issue 3, p24. 8p. 6 Color Photographs, an article i've just skimmed.  Don't have access to the photos, by him, included with the article.
 * -- do ncr  am  02:12, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Here's a link to one of his articles, on Western Hackberry, on pages 12-15, at dezertmagazine (takes a while to load). Nice solid 4 page natural history magazine article.  Maybe his >200 works are mostly like this.  Seems like more a popular writer and a teacher.  I would like to see any search in San Diego newspapers current & historical about him. -- do  ncr  am  02:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep There might be copyvio that I haven't checked. Journals referred by Doncram accurately establishes that Wayne P. Armstrong is notable. Noteswork (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've deleted the copyright violation. Examining the references, the SDUT article seems to be missing, and the NCT article is the only online source that covers the subject with any depth.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  04:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not the point of AfD, article can be shaped later. Noteswork (talk) 17:36, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Discussion about the references and their sources is relevant to WP:Notability, which is often central to AfDs as it is here. It is also common practice in an AfD to inform other editors when the the article is substantially changed during the AfD.  This is so that all participants are talking about the same version, and are aware of content to consider that may have been recently changed and can impact the AfD Consensus.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  05:02, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment – The SDUT article was a reprint of the NCT article. I merged those two cites and added a preemptive archive link to SDUT (which is the link we have). – Margin1522 (talk) 05:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 18:04, 13 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  01:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep – Per, the NCT article is the only in-depth profile we have currently, and I didn't find any others (aside from the one on his site), so GNG might be difficult. But I am going to go with WP:PROF on the strength of the many popular articles, which is also one of the criteria for academics. They do seem to be mainly popular. Here is the WorldCat for Environment Southwest. It seems that it's not indexed by Science Citation Index. Ornament is a jewelry magazine. ZOONOOZ is the magazine of the San Diego Zoo. So, many popular articles on science, well known for those and his website. – Margin1522 (talk) 06:24, 21 January 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.