- 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. – Joe ( talk) 14:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Peter B. Sunderland
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Peter B. Sunderland ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The professor in this category doesn't fit the requirements for Wikipedia's professor test. At best, the person has 2000 citations and has nominal achievements that other professors in the community has had in the past (See: Dr. Chung K Law, Dr. Jay Gore, Dr. Gerry Faeth, DMatthias Ihme, Dr. Kenneth Yu (from the same school has more citations). Awards are nominal and not anywhere close to the aforementioned research scientists in the field. For these reasons, I would like to have Peter B. Sunderland's page removed. LumosFlame ( talk) 08:07, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 September 26. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 08:21, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 11:22, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Being "Keystone Professor" is not an endowed professorship of the type that passes WP:PROF#C5; it is merely a perk given to those faculty willing to teach intro courses [1]. But I think his citation record, with three papers into the triple digits on Google Scholar [2], is above threshold for #C1. The nomination argument is based on WP:WAX and is not good; we should be evaluating the subject on his own merits, not arguing on the basis of missing articles for more-notable people. — David Eppstein ( talk) 16:25, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Weak keep Above threshold for WP:PROF#C1. XOR'easter ( talk) 19:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir ( talk) 21:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Passes WP:PROF#C1. Wm335td ( talk) 19:50, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
DeleteFails WP:PROF#C1.I agree with user David Eppstein on the fact that the absence of other professors' wiki pages isn't a valid reason to remove this one. However, I disagree with the threshold for WP:PROF#C1 as mentioned by User David Eppstien. This metric of only over 100 citations, as mentioned by you, is satisfied by a myriad number of professors in the field of combustion, esp. fire protection. The significance of the highly cited work lies in the co-author GM Faeth, whose articles are sought after. Combining the fact that Wikipedia pages give credible information about the professor and having merely triple digit citations doesn't provide the reader with any salient talking points about having this page. Pages like Google Scholar are used for that purpose, not a Wikipedia page. Hence I propose to have this page removed at the earlierst. LumosFlame ( talk) 05:42, 4 October 2019 (UTC)- Struck the "delete" because the nomination already counts as your !vote. XOR'easter ( talk) 16:00, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per David Eppstein. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:48, 4 October 2019 (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.
- 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. – Joe ( talk) 14:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Peter B. Sunderland
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Peter B. Sunderland ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The professor in this category doesn't fit the requirements for Wikipedia's professor test. At best, the person has 2000 citations and has nominal achievements that other professors in the community has had in the past (See: Dr. Chung K Law, Dr. Jay Gore, Dr. Gerry Faeth, DMatthias Ihme, Dr. Kenneth Yu (from the same school has more citations). Awards are nominal and not anywhere close to the aforementioned research scientists in the field. For these reasons, I would like to have Peter B. Sunderland's page removed. LumosFlame ( talk) 08:07, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 September 26. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 08:21, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 11:22, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Being "Keystone Professor" is not an endowed professorship of the type that passes WP:PROF#C5; it is merely a perk given to those faculty willing to teach intro courses [1]. But I think his citation record, with three papers into the triple digits on Google Scholar [2], is above threshold for #C1. The nomination argument is based on WP:WAX and is not good; we should be evaluating the subject on his own merits, not arguing on the basis of missing articles for more-notable people. — David Eppstein ( talk) 16:25, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Weak keep Above threshold for WP:PROF#C1. XOR'easter ( talk) 19:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir ( talk) 21:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Passes WP:PROF#C1. Wm335td ( talk) 19:50, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
DeleteFails WP:PROF#C1.I agree with user David Eppstein on the fact that the absence of other professors' wiki pages isn't a valid reason to remove this one. However, I disagree with the threshold for WP:PROF#C1 as mentioned by User David Eppstien. This metric of only over 100 citations, as mentioned by you, is satisfied by a myriad number of professors in the field of combustion, esp. fire protection. The significance of the highly cited work lies in the co-author GM Faeth, whose articles are sought after. Combining the fact that Wikipedia pages give credible information about the professor and having merely triple digit citations doesn't provide the reader with any salient talking points about having this page. Pages like Google Scholar are used for that purpose, not a Wikipedia page. Hence I propose to have this page removed at the earlierst. LumosFlame ( talk) 05:42, 4 October 2019 (UTC)- Struck the "delete" because the nomination already counts as your !vote. XOR'easter ( talk) 16:00, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per David Eppstein. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:48, 4 October 2019 (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.