Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith Barber

: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. Consensus is that the subject satisfies WP:PROF. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

=[[Keith Barber]]=

:{{la|Keith Barber}} – (View AfD)(View log)

:({{findsources|Keith Barber}})

Not notable enough (despite drinking Tesco value larger) Iamtheabelman 16:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Delete per nom. The lager preference is a nice touch.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 19:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Delete almost a speedy, notability isn't established beyond being a university professor; consensus says that isn't enough. -Verdatum (talk) 21:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Delete would appear to fail WP:PROF. Bfigura ^(talk) 21:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Change to Keep per evidence of meeting academic notability standard. --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Keep. According to [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=author%3Ake-barber Google scholar], he has three publications with over 100 citations each and an h-index of 22. Beyond bean-counting, I think "peat stratigraphy" is a notable topic — Google scholar finds about 1000 papers on it — and his are the top hits, and five of the top ten, so he's the world expert on the subject. I think that's enough for WP:PROF #1. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Keep. As shown above, clearly satisfies WP:Prof #1 according to usual criteria with a solid record of scholarship. Article needs expansion. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC).
Keep Has more than 3 good publications. --Donotask-donottell (talk) 15:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Keep clearly enough, Scopus has 52 publications, with highest citation counts 157. 92, 89. As usual, lower counts than GS, because Scopus only counts citations from journals, but enough to show him an authority--as one would expect for a full professor from Southampton. DGG ( talk ) 05:03, 18 October 2009 (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.