Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen M. Colarelli

: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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 23:47, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

=[[Stephen M. Colarelli]]=

:{{la|Stephen M. Colarelli}} – (View AfD)(View log)

:({{findsources|Stephen M. Colarelli}})

Non-notable bio per WP:BIO and WP:ACADEMIC, unreferenced. MuffledThud (talk) 22:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —MuffledThud (talk) 22:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. GS cites give h index = 10, GSearch gives high hits so article rates an AfD. Input from scholars in the field would be helpful. Article would need expansion if kept. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC).
  • Keep. Cited Google Scholar search shows enough stature in field to establish notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Web of Science shows 25 peer-reviewed papers-- highest citations 93, 66, 56, 56 --quite respectable for the subject. Full professor at a reasonably good university, so not surprising. His book is in 200 US libraries, according to WorldCat.` DGG ( talk ) 04:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep Per above & according to [http://results.factiva.com/index/index.aspx?ref=INDFED0020061214e2cd0034r EXPERT EVALUATES IRAQ WAR FROM EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE] "Stephen Colarelli is one of the world's leading scholars on the intersection of evolutionary psychology and the workplace."John Z (talk) 11:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep per John Z and DGG. I think on those terms it meets WP:ACADEMIC. Martin Raybourne (talk) 19:51, 9 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.