- 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 delete. Sorry, but we need more than "the article speaks for itself" before we can keep an article. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 08:36, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Bob Keleher
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bob Keleher ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Mitzi.humphrey has moved on from writing about her relatives to now writing about a colleague of (presumably) her relative Thomas M. Humphrey, Bob Keleher. The Forbes piece is a mere mention, the Official Congressional Directory is run of the mill routine listing and the "monetary approach" book is Keleher's. With the remaining three sources, I don't think WP:GNG reaches that low. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir ( talk) 00:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, does not meet WP:PROF. Based on this page, I estimate his h-index at about 9 (someone please correct me if I am wrong). This page lists the 2645 economists with the highest h-index; the highest in the list is 91, the lowest is 14; Keleher is far below that, even though he co-authored some work with a notable economist, Thomas Humphrey. His citations and h-index as lead author are much lower (highest cite 19, h-index about 5). Mitzi.humphrey, would you please refrain from editing or creating pages on topics where you have a conflict of interest – this page should have been created as a draft and submitted through AfC. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 09:14, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- Keep, the article speaks for itself. Mitzi.humphrey 13:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- delete I don't see the significant independent coverage needed to meet the GNG. My search at Google Scholar didn't show me anything that convinces me he's a noted academic. The COI bothers me, but isn't relevant to this discussion. Sandals1 ( talk) 15:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability standards for academics as pointed out by both Sandals1 and Justlettersandnumbers. Like them I also share deep concerns regarding COI. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 19:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- Delete fails GNG, the article includes primary sources it needs more independent sources. Another huge problem is COI which may include original research.___ CAPTAIN MEDUSA talk 00:18, 23 June 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.