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. T. Canens ( talk) 04:59, 10 February 2018 (UTC) reply

James W. LaBelle

James W. LaBelle (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

nothing that hints at notability, does not pass GNG for academics Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 08:47, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost ( talk) 10:08, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost ( talk) 10:08, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost ( talk) 10:08, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost ( talk) 10:08, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete nothing comes even close to showing that LaBelle is anywhere near to close to being notable. No indication that his work is at all impactful, and academic point 1 is the only one that we have any clue he could in theory pass. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 20:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Since he holds a named chair at a major institution of higher education, the Lois L. Rodgers Professorship at Dartmoth, he unambiguously meets criteria #5 listed at WP:NACADEMIC. Gnome de plume ( talk) 16:32, 5 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep per WP:PROF#C5, thanks to Gnome's improvements. — David Eppstein ( talk) 05:46, 6 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep -- meets WP:PROF; an acceptable stub at this point. Does not violate guidelines. K.e.coffman ( talk) 05:06, 7 February 2018 (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.