Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noreen Khan-Mayberry

:{{la|Noreen Khan-Mayberry}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Noreen Khan-Mayberry}})

Does not appear to meet notability criteria as an academic. Majority of sources provided are primary (i.e., NASA biographies, links to authored works) or dead links. No significant coverage in reliable sources found to indicate notability per WP:GNG. Contested WP:PROD. Kinu ^t/_c 06:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

• Delete gnews reveals no significant indepth coverage. fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 08:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Noreen Khan-Mayberry does meet notability criteria as an academic. The nomination for deletion is an attack on female NASA scientists with south Asian heritage. Note that Wiki also deleted Dr. Sharmila Bhattacharya, noted NASA scientist. Dr. Khan-Mayberry's references could be improved, but this is no cause for deletion. Several wiki pages under the category of NASA personnel do not meet wiki standards and have been flagged since 2009 or earlier with no nomination for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toxicologyfan (talk • contribs) — Toxicologyfan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

:*Article on Sharmila Bhattacharya (NASA Ames) seems to be alive and well. Agricola44 (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2011 (UTC).

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:52, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:52, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. Arguing in general terms for better representation of women on WP is certainly worthwhile (and I totally agree that we merit more focus here). However, this discussion is only about Khan-Mayberry, not Dr. Sharmila Bhattacharya, WP biases, other pages that should be deleted, etc. And, I'm afraid the case here is very clear for "delete". WoS shows only 4 publications, only one of which has been referenced at all (5 times). The majority of academics get their pass w.r.t. WP:PROF #1, for which we conventionally require several hundred references. Lots of WP:OR here and some assertions that could demonstrate notability are entirely unreferenced, e.g. "She has been recognized internationally...". For reference, art was created by WP:SPA account Spacequest and has largely been maintained by 2 other SPAs Spacetravels and Toxicologyfan, so may be simply a vanity page. Friendly advice to further commentators. Please leave out accusations about "attacks" and the like – there's no place for that here. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 15:02, 21 April 2011 (UTC).
• Delete on basis of clear analysis of Agricola44. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:10, 22 April 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.