Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fatma Müge Göçek

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. Complex/_Rational 14:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fatma Müge Göçek

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Professor at the University of Michigan that does not have any notable works. It appears as if her only claim to notability is her being a signatory to the I Apologize campaign, but it seems that there were non-notable people that also have this claim. I do not think that this individual is a notable academic.Spiralwidget (talk) 14:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I thought that she had no notable works, but here I am happily corrected- there was a work with a wikipedia article that I did not see (Denial of Violence). In addition, there is evidence that she won a prize (the Mary Douglas Prize) for the book. Now I am just wondering why this is not mentioned in the main article. I will edit to make it clearer why she is considered notable.Spiralwidget (talk) 14:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. She is a rather well known scholar. I noticed that the nominator corrected themselves, but I just wanted to give the discussion a first keep vote.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 16:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 17:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Pretty clearly meets
WP:NPROF, as she has high citations numbers in a typically low-citation field. Curbon7 (talk) 17:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep. Heavy reviews of many books give an easy pass of
WP:PROF#C1 noted above based on high citation counts in a low-citation field. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep: even speedy, clearly meets NAUTHOR for a well-received academic book. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes
WP:Prof#C1. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC).[reply
]

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.