Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Jane Williams

:{{la|Caroline Jane Williams}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Caroline_Jane_Williams Stats])

:({{Find sources|Caroline Jane Williams}})

Non-notable academic. Meets neither WP:ACADEMIC, WP:NAUTHOR, or WP:GNG. Contested proposed deletion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

• Delete Not notable. Wrote a book and some academic journal articles. Has no biographical articles written about her in reliable sources. Strawberrie Fields (talk) 19:56, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete as obvious hoax. Banana Studies? Studying Pink Elephants? "Grand poohbah of Cadbury mini eggs?" Obvious and blatant hoax/attack page. Marginal at best, few to no reliable sources covering the subject.Kindzmarauli (talk) 14:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

:* {{ping|Kindzmarauli}} There are a lot of IPs vandalizing the article for unknown reasons. Either her "friends", her students, or just a random 4chan-like target. If you read the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Caroline_Jane_Williams&oldid=620676996 last stable version], the article is better. I was a little leery about setting semi-protection on the article since it would lock out the original author and I'm WP:INVOLVED, but with the heavy IP vandalism from multiple sources, I've asked for another admin to semi-protect it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 16:03, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• Weak delete - real scholar, with odd academic interests, but not well-cited. Bearian (talk) 17:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
• Note: I've semi-protected the article, and won't participate here, but I would ask that both participants and closer pay careful attention to attempts to add any material (e.g. sources) that might support retention (or, for that matter, deletion) at places like the article talk page. Thank you. --j⚛e decker^talk 18:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

:: I have the article on my watchlist so any requests will be handled as appropriate. I'm beginning to think this is either a class project or related to a class. I deleted Southampton University Pre-Sessional Course, whom the article subject is an advisor at, earlier as a copyright violation, but has been recreated without the copied material (I proposed that for deletion, too). -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• Delete fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:ACADEMIC, lack of coverage in reliable sources. People must be discussed, in multiple, independent, reliable publications, to achieve the level of notability required. Additionally, while citations to primary sources do provide verification for things like entry in the Southampton Parkrun, that information alone does not go to notability. Similarly, related sites, such as those of the University of Arizona's American Indian Studies programme do not show notability. --Bejnar (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:ACADEMIC. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 18:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete An entry level student of Native American studies. She might eventually be notable but is not there yet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:01, 17 August 2014 (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.