Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marina Caskey

Marina Caskey

Marina Caskey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Article doesn't pass

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Dimmi!!! 04:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Dimmi!!! 04:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Dimmi!!! 04:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• Keep. This is a high-citation field but despite that her citation record (three publications with over 500 cites on Google scholar, many more with over 200) looks strong enough for
  WP:PROF#C1. And there's in-depth sourcing available to make a verifiable article at pages like [1] — it's not independent but it doesn't need to be for WP:PROF-based notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep, concur that the citation record evident on google scholar shows this is strong enough for NPROF-1.--Eostrix  (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 07:23, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as others have said, seems to meet
  WP:DINC. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:15, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep as per David Eppstein NHCLS (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I checked and the article should be kept, also as per David Eppstein Dorota Uchis (talk) 15:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep passes WP:PROF#C1. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 18:55, 26 July 2021 (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.